From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Fry

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 27, 1990
165 A.D.2d 961 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

September 27, 1990

Appeal from the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Nicandri, J.).


Defendant's principal contention on appeal is that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his trial attorney did not adequately explore and present his claimed defense that he was not driving the vehicle when it was stopped. However, defendant's criticism that this defense was not explored more vigorously by calling more witnesses is "nothing more than an attack on the trial strategy employed and does not substantiate a denial of meaningful representation" (People v Szarka, 163 A.D.2d 758). Defendant's remaining arguments are also without merit (see, People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495; People v. Miller, 163 A.D.2d 627, 629).

Judgment affirmed. Kane, J.P., Weiss, Levine, Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Fry

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 27, 1990
165 A.D.2d 961 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Fry

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DOUGLAS M. FRY…

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

Date published: Sep 27, 1990

Citations

165 A.D.2d 961 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
561 N.Y.S.2d 848

Citing Cases

People v. Betsch

Contrary to the further contention of defendant, his assigned counsel during the CPL article 330 hearing was…