From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Soto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 18, 1994
203 A.D.2d 496 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

April 18, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Harbater, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel lacks merit because on our review of the record it is clear that he received meaningful representation (see, People v Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 146-147). Here, defense counsel performed effectively by, among other things, focusing on the weakness in the People's proof and the inconsistencies in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses, delivering cogent opening and closing statements, and presenting a plausible defense.

The defendant further contends that the prosecutor's summation was improper and constituted reversible error. To the extent that the defendant's objections were preserved for appellate review, the prosecutor's challenged remarks constituted fair response to defense counsel's summation, during which he challenged the credibility of the witnesses (see, People v Aviles, 176 A.D.2d 584; People v Williams, 174 A.D.2d 494).

Moreover, we find that the sentence imposed was neither harsh nor excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Thompson, J.P., Copertino, Pizzuto and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Soto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 18, 1994
203 A.D.2d 496 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Soto

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ROBERT SOTO, Appellant

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

Date published: Apr 18, 1994

Citations

203 A.D.2d 496 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
610 N.Y.S.2d 873