PEOPLE v. MEJIAS (2000)

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kreindler, J.), rendered March 12, 1998, convicting him of assault in the first degree and assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

 The defendant's contention that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel is without merit.  “What constitutes effective assistance is not and cannot be fixed with yardstick precision, but varies according to the unique circumstances of each representation” (People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 146, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400).   In resolving claims of ineffective assistance of counsel the critical issue is whether, viewed in totality, the defense counsel provided meaningful representation (see, People v. Benn, 68 N.Y.2d 941, 510 N.Y.S.2d 81, 502 N.E.2d 996).   The defense counsel presented a reasoned theory of defense, effectively cross-examined the People's witnesses, and delivered cogent opening and closing statements.   Therefore, the defendant was provided with meaningful representation (see, People v. Baldi, supra;  People v. Johnson, 184 A.D.2d 732, 587 N.Y.S.2d 187;  People v. Ortiz, 174 A.D.2d 763, 573 N.Y.S.2d 878).

 The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675).   Moreover, the Supreme Court properly imposed consecutive sentences where the crimes committed were based on separate and distinct acts (see, People v. Laureano, 87 N.Y.2d 640, 642 N.Y.S.2d 150, 664 N.E.2d 1212;  People v. Saulters, 255 A.D.2d 896, 682 N.Y.S.2d 740).

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.