From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Blaylock

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 15, 1999
266 A.D.2d 400 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

Submitted October 12, 1999

November 15, 1999

Andrew J. Schatkin, Jericho, N.Y., for appellant.

Denis Dillon, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Peter A. Weinstein and John F. McGlynn of counsel), for respondent.

LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., DANIEL W. JOY, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Honorof, J.), rendered May 22, 1997, convicting him of rape in the first degree, rape in the second degree, and endangering the welfare of a child, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The trial court did not err in relieving the defendant's first assigned counsel and assigning a new attorney to represent him, as the defendant's first assigned counsel also represented a witness for the prosecution (see, N Y State Bar Association, Ethics Opinion 290 [1973]; Code of Professional Responsibility 5-105[B] [ 22 NYCRR 1200.24 (b)]; EC 5-14, 5-15; People v. Scotti, 142 A.D.2d 616 ).

The defendant claims that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel with respect to the second assigned counsel. To the extent that the argument is premised upon that attorney's failure to present certain evidence, the defendant's claim involves matters which are dehors the record and is not properly presented on direct appeal (see, People v. Davis, 261 A.D.2d 411 [2d Dept., May 3, 1999]; People v. Hewitt, 258 A.D.2d 668 ; People v. Clark, 254 A.D.2d 299 ; People v. Boyd, 244 A.D.2d 497 ; People v. Lebrun, 234 A.D.2d 392 ). Insofar as we are able to review the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, we find that the performance of the defendant's second assigned counsel amply met the standard of meaningful representation (see, People v. Ellis, 81 N.Y.2d 854 ;People v. Satterfield, 66 N.Y.2d 796 ; People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137 ).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or do not require reversal.

BRACKEN, J.P., JOY, GOLDSTEIN, and LUCIANO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Blaylock

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 15, 1999
266 A.D.2d 400 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

People v. Blaylock

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. MICHAEL BLAYLOCK, appellant. (Ind. No…

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

Date published: Nov 15, 1999

Citations

266 A.D.2d 400 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
697 N.Y.S.2d 522

Citing Cases

People v. Twedt

When these interests are in need of protection, they even override a waiver of the right to client…

People v. Rufus

The court relieved defendant's first attorney of his representation of defendant after learning that the…