From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Chaney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 8, 2001
284 A.D.2d 998 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Summary

In Chaney, the Fourth Department, quoting from Barnes, ruled that defense counsel's concession of guilt to the second and third counts of the indictment was not "`tantamount to a partial plea of guilt, thus requiring defendant's express consent'."

Summary of this case from People v. Washington

Opinion

June 8, 2001.

(Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Wolfgang, J. — Criminal Contempt, 1st Degree.)

PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., HAYES, WISNER, KEHOE AND LAWTON, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum:

We reject the contention of defendant that he did not effectively waive his right to a jury trial ( see, People v. Cotton, 167 A.D.2d 884, lv dismissed 77 N.Y.2d 904, cert denied 513 U.S. 1093; People v. Logue, 115 A.D.2d 285, lv denied 67 N.Y.2d 886). Defense counsel's concession of defendant's guilt of the second and third counts of the indictment was part of a reasonable trial strategy and did not deny defendant meaningful representation ( see, People v. Ellis, 81 N.Y.2d 854, 856-857; People v. Goss, 229 A.D.2d 791, 793). Nor was defense counsel's concession "tantamount to a partial plea of guilt, thus requiring defendant's express consent" ( People v. Barnes, 249 A.D.2d 227, 228, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 893). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction of harassment in the second degree ( see, People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice ( see, CPL 470.15 [a]). Supreme Court substantially complied with the requirements of CPL 400.21 in sentencing defendant as a second felony offender ( see, People v. Graham, 67 A.D.2d 172, 179; see also, People v. Goodings, 277 A.D.2d 725, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 735), and the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.


Summaries of

People v. Chaney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 8, 2001
284 A.D.2d 998 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

In Chaney, the Fourth Department, quoting from Barnes, ruled that defense counsel's concession of guilt to the second and third counts of the indictment was not "`tantamount to a partial plea of guilt, thus requiring defendant's express consent'."

Summary of this case from People v. Washington

In Chaney, the Fourth Department, quoting from Barnes, ruled that defense counsel's concession of guilt to the second and third counts of the indictment was not "`tantamount to a partial plea of guilt, thus requiring defendant's express consent'."

Summary of this case from People v. Washington

In Chaney, the Fourth Department, quoting from Barnes, ruled that defense counsel's concession of guilt to the second and third counts of the indictment was not "`tantamount to a partial plea of guilt, thus requiring defendant's express consent'."

Summary of this case from People v. Washington
Case details for

People v. Chaney

Case Details

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

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

Date published: Jun 8, 2001

Citations

284 A.D.2d 998 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
727 N.Y.S.2d 372

Citing Cases

People v. Weathersby

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

People v. Washington

It does not follow, of course, that defense counsel has sole authority to make those decisions. The People…