From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Bradford

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
Apr 29, 2016
138 A.D.3d 1436 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)

Opinion

320 KA 14-01534.

04-29-2016

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Daniel BRADFORD, Jr., Defendant–Appellant.

D.J. & J.A. Cirando, ESQS., Syracuse (John A. Cirando of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Brooks T. Baker, District Attorney, Bath (John C. Tunney of Counsel), for Respondent.


D.J. & J.A. Cirando, ESQS., Syracuse (John A. Cirando of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant.

Brooks T. Baker, District Attorney, Bath (John C. Tunney of Counsel), for Respondent.

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, CURRAN, and TROUTMAN, JJ.

Opinion

MEMORANDUM: Defendant appeals from a resentence upon his conviction of, inter alia, murder in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.25[1] ). Contrary to defendant's contention, County Court properly denied his motion seeking substitution of counsel at the resentencing proceeding. Defendant failed to establish “ ‘good cause for a substitution,’ such as a conflict of interest or other irreconcilable conflict with counsel” (People v. Sides, 75 N.Y.2d 822, 824, 552 N.Y.S.2d 555, 551 N.E.2d 1233 ; see People v. Brooks, 37 A.D.3d 1056, 1057, 829 N.Y.S.2d 322 ; People v. Welch, 2 A.D.3d 1354, 1355, 770 N.Y.S.2d 230, lv. denied 2 N.Y.3d 747, 778 N.Y.S.2d 473, 810 N.E.2d 926 ).

Defendant's contentions concerning the assistance of counsel provided at trial are not reviewable on appeal from the resentence (see People v. Smith, 21 A.D.3d 1360, 1360, 801 N.Y.S.2d 218 ; People v. Coble, 17 A.D.3d 1165, 1165, 794 N.Y.S.2d 549, lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 787, 801 N.Y.S.2d 807, 835 N.E.2d 667 ; People v. Luddington, 5 A.D.3d 1042, 1042, 773 N.Y.S.2d 698, lv. denied 3 N.Y.3d 643, 782 N.Y.S.2d 414, 816 N.E.2d 204 ). Finally, we reject defendant's contention that he was denied effective assistance of counsel at the resentencing proceeding (see Brooks, 37 A.D.3d at 1057, 829 N.Y.S.2d 322 ; see generally People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400 ).

It is hereby ORDERED that the resentence so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Bradford

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
Apr 29, 2016
138 A.D.3d 1436 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
Case details for

People v. Bradford

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. DANIEL BRADFORD, JR.…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

Date published: Apr 29, 2016

Citations

138 A.D.3d 1436 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
29 N.Y.S.3d 729
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 3321

Citing Cases

People v. Caswell

Defendant's remaining contentions in his pro se supplemental brief are not properly before us. To the extent…

People v. Caswell

Defendant's remaining contentions in his pro se supplemental brief are not properly before us. To the extent…