From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Brown

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jun 5, 2013
107 A.D.3d 732 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-06-5

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Carlos BROWN, appellant.

Adam Paltrowitz, Chester, N.Y., for appellant. Francis D. Phillips II, District Attorney, Middletown, N.Y. (Lauren E. Grasso and Andrew R. Kass of counsel), for respondent.


Adam Paltrowitz, Chester, N.Y., for appellant. Francis D. Phillips II, District Attorney, Middletown, N.Y. (Lauren E. Grasso and Andrew R. Kass of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered June 22, 2011, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, criminal mischief in the fourth degree (three counts), aggravated criminal contempt (three counts), criminal contempt in the first degree (four counts), robbery in the third degree, stalking in the first degree, assault in the third degree (two counts), and criminal contempt in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that a mistrial was warranted due to the complaining witness's outbursts during cross-examination or, in the alternative, that a curative instruction was required to alleviate any prejudice that he may have suffered, is unpreserved for appellate review since he failed to request such relief at trial ( seeCPL 470.05[2]; People v. Madramootoo, 267 A.D.2d 477, 700 N.Y.S.2d 864;People v. Antomarchi, 261 A.D.2d 312, 692 N.Y.S.2d 303;People v. Harvin, 254 A.D.2d 29, 680 N.Y.S.2d 81), and we decline to review it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

The defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of trial counsel ( see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584;People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400). Moreover, contrary to the defendant's contention, even if his initial assigned counsel failed to act on the defendant's desire to testify before the grand jury, any such failure on the part of counsel did not, under the circumstances of this case, amount to the denial of the effective assistance of counsel ( see People v. Simmons, 10 N.Y.3d 946, 949, 862 N.Y.S.2d 852, 893 N.E.2d 130;People v. Wiggins, 89 N.Y.2d 872, 873, 653 N.Y.S.2d 91, 675 N.E.2d 845;People v. Griffith, 76 A.D.3d 1102, 908 N.Y.S.2d 123).

MASTRO, J.P., HALL, LOTT and SGROI, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Brown

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jun 5, 2013
107 A.D.3d 732 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

People v. Brown

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Carlos BROWN, appellant.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Jun 5, 2013

Citations

107 A.D.3d 732 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
965 N.Y.S.2d 892
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 4016

Citing Cases

People v. Carlson

e challenged comments did not constitute ineffective assistance because none of the challenged comments were…

People v. Carlson

Contrary to defendant's further contention, we conclude that defense counsel's failure to object to the…