From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Aramas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 19, 1998
250 A.D.2d 478 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

May 19, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Vincent Vitale, J.)


By consenting to the joinder of defendants and the codefendants indictment, by failing to request severance and by explicitly requesting a limiting instruction when the court admitted the statement of the non-testifying co-defendant, defendant has waived his present claim that he was denied the right of confrontation ( see, People v. Graham, 228 A.D.2d 299, lv. denied 88 N.Y.2d 985). In any event, given the overwhelming evidence of guilt, the Bruton error ( Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123) was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt ( see, People v. Hamlin, 71 N.Y.2d 750, 758).

Review of defendants claim of ineffective assistance of counsel would require a further record to be developed by way of an appropriate motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 ( see, People v. Love, 57 N.Y.2d 998). Based on the existing record, we find defendant was afforded the effective assistance of counsel ( see, People v. Hobot, 84 N.Y.2d 1021, 1024;. People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137).

We have considered defendants remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Milonas, J.P., Rosenberger, Nardelli, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Aramas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 19, 1998
250 A.D.2d 478 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Aramas

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. LUIS ARAMAS, Also…

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

Date published: May 19, 1998

Citations

250 A.D.2d 478 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
672 N.Y.S.2d 702

Citing Cases

People v. Serrano

The jury saw and heard the witnesses and resolved any inconsistencies or credibility issues against…