From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Flowers

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Oct 22, 2014
121 A.D.3d 1014 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

2014-10-22

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Immanuel FLOWERS, appellant.

Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, N.Y. (Lawrence T. Hausman of counsel), for appellant. Kenneth P. Thompson, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Sholom J. Twersky of counsel), for respondent.


Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, N.Y. (Lawrence T. Hausman of counsel), for appellant. Kenneth P. Thompson, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Sholom J. Twersky of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrus, J.), imposed October 3, 2012, upon his conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, after remittitur from this Court for resentencing (People v. Flowers, 97 A.D.3d 693, 947 N.Y.S.2d 886), the resentence being an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 20 years to life as a persistent violent felony offender.

ORDERED that the resentence is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the resentence imposed was improperly based on counts which were dismissed at trial for lack of legally sufficient evidence is unpreserved for appellate review ( seeCPL 470.05[2]; see also People v. Harris, 101 A.D.3d 900, 900, 954 N.Y.S.2d 920; People v. Stanley, 50 A.D.3d 1066, 1067–1068, 856 N.Y.S.2d 221; People v. Rambali, 27 A.D.3d 582, 582, 813 N.Y.S.2d 103), and, in any event, is without merit ( see People v. Harris, 101 A.D.3d at 900, 954 N.Y.S.2d 920; People v. Stanley, 50 A.D.3d at 1067–1068, 856 N.Y.S.2d 221). Furthermore, defense counsel's failure to register an objection to this claimed error at resentencing did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel, as defense counsel could not have been ineffective for failing to advance an argument that had no chance of success ( see People v. Caban, 5 N.Y.3d 143, 152, 800 N.Y.S.2d 70, 833 N.E.2d 213; People v. DiPippo, 117 A.D.3d 1076, 1077, 986 N.Y.S.2d 243).

The resentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675). DICKERSON, J.P., LEVENTHAL, SGROI and LaSALLE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Flowers

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Oct 22, 2014
121 A.D.3d 1014 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

People v. Flowers

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Immanuel FLOWERS, appellant.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Oct 22, 2014

Citations

121 A.D.3d 1014 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
121 A.D.3d 1014
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 7179

Citing Cases

People v. Flowers

Defendant also argued that his counsel had been ineffective for failing to object to the court's imposition…

People v. Flowers

Defendant also argued that his counsel had been ineffective for failing to object to the court's imposition…