From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Candelario

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 3, 2003
307 A.D.2d 771 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

KA 02-01948

July 3, 2003.

Appeal from a judgment of Ontario County Court (Harvey, J.), entered November 24, 1999, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of, inter alia, burglary in the second degree.

DEL ATWELL, MONTAUK, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

R. MICHAEL TANTILLO, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, CANANDAIGUA (JAMES B. RITTS OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., WISNER, BURNS, GORSKI, AND HAYES, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum:

We reject the contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Defendant received "an advantageous plea and nothing in the record casts doubt on the apparent effectiveness of counsel," and thus we conclude that he received meaningful representation ( People v. Ford, 86 N.Y.2d 397, 404). The bargained-for sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.


Summaries of

People v. Candelario

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 3, 2003
307 A.D.2d 771 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Candelario

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. BENJAMIN O…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Jul 3, 2003

Citations

307 A.D.2d 771 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
762 N.Y.S.2d 856

Citing Cases

People v. Reid

The record, as a whole, demonstrates that the Defendant received an advantageous plea. People v. Brown, 305…

People v. O'Conner

We reject that contention. At no point was defense counsel relieved of his assignment, and defense counsel…