From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Midlarsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 8, 1991
172 A.D.2d 631 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

April 8, 1991

Appeal from the County Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.).


Ordered that the judgment and order are affirmed.

We find no merit to the defendant's contention that he was denied the effective assistance of trial counsel (see, People v Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137). In addition, the imposition of consecutive sentences was not illegal (see, Penal Law § 70.25; People v. Truesdell, 70 N.Y.2d 809, 811; People v. Brathwaite, 63 N.Y.2d 839; People v. Chandler, 106 A.D.2d 677), nor were the sentences excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Finally, the defendant's motion, pursuant to CPL 440.10, to vacate the judgment of conviction was properly denied for reasons stated by Justice Hillery at the Supreme Court. Lawrence, J.P., Eiber, Balletta and Ritter, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Midlarsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 8, 1991
172 A.D.2d 631 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Midlarsky

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. SHELDON MIDLARSKY…

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

Date published: Apr 8, 1991

Citations

172 A.D.2d 631 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)