From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hoedouglas

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Mar 24, 2021
192 A.D.3d 1044 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)

Opinion

2017–03677 Ind. No. 759/16

03-24-2021

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Shaheim HOEDOUGLAS, appellant.

Shaheim Hoedouglas, Moravia, NY, appellant pro se. Timothy D. Sini, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Timothy P. Finnerty of counsel), for respondent.


Shaheim Hoedouglas, Moravia, NY, appellant pro se.

Timothy D. Sini, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Timothy P. Finnerty of counsel), for respondent.

LEONARD B. AUSTIN, J.P., SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, ROBERT J. MILLER, HECTOR D. LASALLE, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated May 20, 2020 ( People v. Hoedouglas, 183 A.D.3d 840, 122 N.Y.S.3d 558 ), affirming a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered March 7, 2017.

ORDERED that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel ( see Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745, 103 S.Ct. 3308, 77 L.Ed.2d 987 ; People v. Stultz, 2 N.Y.3d 277, 778 N.Y.S.2d 431, 810 N.E.2d 883 ).

AUSTIN, J.P., HINDS–RADIX, MILLER and LASALLE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Hoedouglas

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Mar 24, 2021
192 A.D.3d 1044 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
Case details for

People v. Hoedouglas

Case Details

Full title:The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Shaheim Hoedouglas…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Mar 24, 2021

Citations

192 A.D.3d 1044 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
192 A.D.3d 1044
2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 1786