From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Kirby

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 5, 1987
133 A.D.2d 652 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

October 5, 1987

Appeal from the County Court, Suffolk County (Harris, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the evidence adduced at trial established the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15).

We reject the defendant's contention that he was denied the effective assistance of trial counsel because his attorney failed to call the defendant's landlady as a witness. "It is not for this court to second-guess whether a course chosen by defendant's counsel was the best trial strategy, or even a good one, so long as defendant was afforded meaningful representation" (People v Satterfield, 66 N.Y.2d 796, 799-800). We note that the defendant's further claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are based on facts outside the record and therefore are not properly before this court.

Finally, under the circumstances of this case, we find that the sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Thompson, J.P., Bracken, Niehoff and Harwood, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Kirby

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 5, 1987
133 A.D.2d 652 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

People v. Kirby

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. FREDERICK WADE KIRBY…

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

Date published: Oct 5, 1987

Citations

133 A.D.2d 652 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

People v. Lou

The failure to call a witness does not automatically deprive a defendant of meaningful representation. See…