Opinion
Argued April 24, 2001.
May 14, 2001.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gerges, J.), rendered September 9, 1997, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (three counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
David H. Weiss, New York, N.Y., for appellant, and appellant pro se.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Jacqueline M. Linares of counsel), for respondent.
Before: RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, H. MILLER and SMITH, JJ.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel is without merit. The question is whether, viewed in the totality of the circumstances, the defense provided by counsel constituted meaningful representation (see, People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708; People v. Ellis, 81 N.Y.2d 854). Ineffective assistance of counsel may not be premised upon unsuccessful trial strategy by defense counsel (see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137). Under the circumstances of this case, we find that defense counsel provided meaningful representation.
The defendant's remaining contentions, raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05), without merit (see, People v. Taranovich, 37 N.Y.2d 442; People v. Fernandez, 229 A.D.2d 447; People v. Murphy, 212 A.D.2d 811; People v. Foster, 205 A.D.2d 313), or were waived (see, People v. Lawrence, 64 N.Y.2d 200)