Opinion
April 20, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Richard Price, J.).
The trial court properly reinstated the previously dismissed first count of the indictment for criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree. Upon reargument, the Judge was presented with a complete set of the Grand Jury minutes (which he had not seen before) and properly reinstated the first count of the indictment as he found that the Grand Jury was properly instructed as to the crime charged in the first count (see, People v Lynch, 162 A.D.2d 134, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 941).
The court correctly denied defendant's motion to suppress the narcotic evidence. As to the police officer's personnel file, the Judge reviewed it in camera and concluded that it did not warrant disclosure. There appears to be no abuse of discretion by the Judge in refusing to disclose the contents.
While defendant complains that his trial attorney failed to effectively represent him, the record clearly demonstrates that counsel's representation of defendant was meaningful and certainly adequate. While several of counsel's strategic decisions may not have proven successful, this is no reason, under the circumstances, to conclude that counsel's representation of defendant was ineffective (see, People v Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705).
Finally, as the People concede, given that the second count of the indictment for criminally using drug paraphernalia was dismissed by the trial court, and was not reinstated, as was the first count of the indictment, the court improperly convicted defendant of that count. Accordingly, defendant's conviction for that count of the indictment is vacated.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Kupferman, JJ.