From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Nakovics

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 28, 1988
144 A.D.2d 704 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

November 28, 1988

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


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

At trial, the prosecution improperly elicited photographic identification testimony on direct examination. Defense counsel objected but refrained from making a motion for a mistrial. The defendant contends that the failure to move for a mistrial constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. We disagree. A review of the record reveals that the attorney provided meaningful representation (see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 146-147; see also, People v. Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705, 708-709; People v. Harris, 109 A.D.2d 351).

The defendant's further contention that he was deprived of a fair trial as a result of the court's charge is unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law (CPL 470.15), and review in the interest of justice is not warranted. Weinstein, J.P., Bracken, Kunzeman and Rubin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Nakovics

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 28, 1988
144 A.D.2d 704 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

People v. Nakovics

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. PHILIP NAKOVICS…

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

Date published: Nov 28, 1988

Citations

144 A.D.2d 704 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

People v. Ricketts

Here, as the record fails to disclose when and for what duration, if at all, the defendant was asleep during…

People v. Lane

Memorandum: There is no merit to the contention that defense counsel's failure to move for a mistrial…