From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Moore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 17, 1992
186 A.D.2d 44 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

September 17, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Richard Lee Price, J.).


Defendant's contention that trial counsel was ineffective is unsupported by the record. Counsel's failure to recite both indictment numbers on his omnibus notice of motion did not prejudice defendant, inasmuch as the motion was denied with leave to renew. Defendant fails to demonstrate any prejudice or disadvantage resulting from trial counsel's having declined to renew, or to move ab initio with respect to the identification of defendant as to Indictment # 3956/89. We note that defendant was identified in three separate lineups and that the identification in Indictment # 3811/89 was spontaneous. Defendant's argument that having complained at sentencing that he had not been given copies of the arrest reports should somehow be construed as having indicated a desire to withdraw his guilty plea, is unpersuasive. In the circumstances, we find no abuse of discretion in the sentences imposed.

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Asch, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Moore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 17, 1992
186 A.D.2d 44 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. Moore

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. NELSON MOORE, Appellant

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

Date published: Sep 17, 1992

Citations

186 A.D.2d 44 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
587 N.Y.S.2d 649