Opinion
November 12, 1999
Appeal from Judgment of Cayuga County Court, Contiguglia, J. — Promoting Prison Contraband, 1st Degree.
PRESENT: LAWTON, J. P., WISNER, PIGOTT, JR., HURLBUTT AND SCUDDER, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum:
Defendant's conviction following a jury trial of promoting prison contraband in the first degree (Penal Law § 205.25) arose from a fight between defendant and another inmate in a prison recreation yard during which defendant used a razor-type weapon. Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the trial court's instruction to the jury on reasonable doubt improperly diluted the People's burden of proof (see, People v. Robinson, 88 N.Y.2d 1001; People v. Swift, 241 A.D.2d 949, 950, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 881, 1013). In any event, the instruction on reasonable doubt, when viewed as a whole, conveyed the proper standard (see, People v. Paris, 229 A.D.2d 926, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 1070; People v. Swift, supra, at 950).
Defendant also failed to preserve for our review his contention that the proof is legally insufficient to establish that he knowingly obtained or possessed prison contraband (see, People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19; People v. Cona, 49 N.Y.2d 26, 33). In any event, according the People the benefit of every reasonable inference (see, People v. Ford, 66 N.Y.2d 428, 437; People v. Lewis, 64 N.Y.2d 1111, 1112), we conclude that the testimony of the inmate records coordinator is legally sufficient to establish that defendant received an inmate rule book containing a written prohibition and description of contraband (see generally, People v. Williams, 84 N.Y.2d 925; People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495).
Lastly, we reject the contention that defendant was deprived of effective assistance of counsel. The record establishes that defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708).