From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Bradford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 7, 1994
202 A.D.2d 441 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

March 7, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Carey, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, we find that he was not deprived of his constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel because counsel did not file a notice of alibi. The record reveals that the defense counsel was not informed by his client of the purported existence of an alibi witness until after the trial had started. The defense counsel vigorously attempted to call this witness; however, the court in its discretion precluded the witness from testifying. The record demonstrates that the defendant was provided with meaningful representation (see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137). It was shown that counsel made a cogent opening statement, conducted tenacious and skillful cross-examination and made a well-reasoned closing statement (see, People v. Finch, 199 A.D.2d 278). Bracken, J.P., O'Brien, Copertino and Hart, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Bradford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 7, 1994
202 A.D.2d 441 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Bradford

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. SHERMAN BRADFORD…

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

Date published: Mar 7, 1994

Citations

202 A.D.2d 441 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
608 N.Y.S.2d 511

Citing Cases

People v. Woodard

Defendant admittedly failed to inform defense counsel that he invoked his right to counsel prior to giving…

People v. Woodard

Defendant admittedly failed to inform defense counsel that he invoked his right to counsel prior to giving…