From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Maddox

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 2, 1995
213 A.D.2d 159 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

March 2, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Vincent Vitale, J.).


After reviewing the trial record we cannot say that the defense theory, that defendant was the innocent victim of overzealous police action, was ineffective, or that defendant's attorney failed to provide meaningful representation sufficient to satisfy the constitutional requirement (People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147; People v. Jackson, 52 N.Y.2d 1027, 1029). The foregoing determination is made without the benefit of knowing what was in defense counsel's mind, a point which may have been developed had an appropriate post-judgment motion been made pursuant to CPL 440.10 (People v. Jones, 55 N.Y.2d 771, 773).

To the extent that defense counsel's opening statement may have suggested that defendant had the burden of proof to demonstrate his innocence, any prejudice caused thereby was eliminated by the court's subsequent instructions regarding the burden of proof.

Concur — Wallach, J.P., Rubin, Asch, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Maddox

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 2, 1995
213 A.D.2d 159 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Maddox

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CRAIG MADDOX, Appellant

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

Date published: Mar 2, 1995

Citations

213 A.D.2d 159 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
624 N.Y.S.2d 803

Citing Cases

People v. Benevento

Since the indictment contained only a single robbery count, and no assault count, the ultimate goal of this…