From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Mewa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 14, 1987
135 A.D.2d 662 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

December 14, 1987

Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Boklan, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We find the defendant's argument that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at the suppression hearing to be without merit. A review of the record fails to disclose that the defendant's representation was not "adequate or effective in any meaningful sense of the words" (People v Droz, 39 N.Y.2d 457, 463). Rather, the representation provided was clearly meaningful as defense counsel vigorously pursued the defendant's suppression claims, effectively cross-examined the People's witnesses and argued the law in his client's best interest (see, People v Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137). That his defense was not successful does not lead inevitably to the conclusion that its presentation was fundamentally ineffective (see, People v Baldi, supra, at 146-147).

We have reviewed the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P.J., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Harwood, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Mewa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 14, 1987
135 A.D.2d 662 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

People v. Mewa

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DAVID V. MEWA…

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

Date published: Dec 14, 1987

Citations

135 A.D.2d 662 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)