From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hamilton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 20, 1991
173 A.D.2d 642 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

May 20, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that he was denied the effective assistance of trial counsel. We find that when considered as a whole, trial counsel's performance was sufficiently competent to satisfy the defendant's constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel (see, People v Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137).

Since the defendant failed to object to the closure of the courtroom at trial when the undercover officer testified, the issue is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Scott, 134 A.D.2d 379; People v Boyd, 64 A.D.2d 668). Kunzeman, J.P., Balletta, Miller and O'Brien, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Hamilton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 20, 1991
173 A.D.2d 642 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Hamilton

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANTHONY HAMILTON…

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

Date published: May 20, 1991

Citations

173 A.D.2d 642 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
570 N.Y.S.2d 223

Citing Cases

People v. Diaz

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant's contention that the Supreme Court erred in closing the…

People v. Batista

The defendant's contention that the court erred in closing the courtroom during the testimony of an…