From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Grant

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
May 6, 2020
183 A.D.3d 562 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)

Opinion

2017–12382 Ind. No. 424/16

05-06-2020

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Madi GRANT, appellant.

Joseph F. DeFelice, Kew Gardens, NY, for appellant. Madeline Singas, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Kevin C. King and Donald Berk of counsel), for respondent.


Joseph F. DeFelice, Kew Gardens, NY, for appellant.

Madeline Singas, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Kevin C. King and Donald Berk of counsel), for respondent.

CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, ROBERT J. MILLER, LINDA J. CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Francis Ricigliano, J.), rendered November 2, 2017, convicting him of promoting prison contraband in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932 ), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt of promoting prison contraband in the first degree beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon our independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15[5] ; People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 ), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Romero, 7 N.Y.3d 633, 826 N.Y.S.2d 163, 859 N.E.2d 902 ).

The defendant's contention that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel is based, in part, on matter appearing on the record and, in part, on matter dehors the record, and thus constitutes a "mixed claim" of ineffective assistance of counsel ( People v. Maxwell, 89 A.D.3d 1108, 1109, 933 N.Y.S.2d 386 ; see People v. Evans, 16 N.Y.3d 571, 575 n 2, 925 N.Y.S.2d 366, 949 N.E.2d 457 ). Since the defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel cannot be resolved without reference to matter outside the record, a CPL 440.10 proceeding is the appropriate forum for reviewing the claim in its entirety, and we decline to review the claim on this direct appeal (see People v. Freeman, 93 A.D.3d 805, 806, 940 N.Y.S.2d 314 ; People v. Maxwell, 89 A.D.3d at 1109, 933 N.Y.S.2d 386 ).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

CHAMBERS, J.P., AUSTIN, MILLER and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Grant

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
May 6, 2020
183 A.D.3d 562 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
Case details for

People v. Grant

Case Details

Full title:The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Madi Grant, appellant.

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

Date published: May 6, 2020

Citations

183 A.D.3d 562 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
183 A.D.3d 562
2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 2607