From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Strempack

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 31, 1988
71 N.Y.2d 1015 (N.Y. 1988)

Opinion

Decided May 31, 1988

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department, Francis J. Vogt, J.

Jeremiah M. Flaherty for appellant.

Michael Kavanagh, District Attorney (Joan Lamb of counsel), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defense counsel's failure to make a suppression motion prior to negotiating a plea bargain for his client does not, on this record, constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. Although defendant might have prevailed on such a motion, success was by no means certain. Had the suppression motion been denied, it is doubtful that the favorable bargain counsel obtained for defendant would still have been available. Thus, defense counsel's representation was consistent with a legitimate and ultimately successful strategy (see, People v Benn, 68 N.Y.2d 941, 942; People v Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705).

Defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER, TITONE, HANCOCK, JR., and BELLACOSA concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 N.Y.CRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.


Summaries of

People v. Strempack

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 31, 1988
71 N.Y.2d 1015 (N.Y. 1988)
Case details for

People v. Strempack

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RITA M. STREMPACK…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: May 31, 1988

Citations

71 N.Y.2d 1015 (N.Y. 1988)
530 N.Y.S.2d 100
525 N.E.2d 746

Citing Cases

People v. Walton

As to defendant's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, we find no merit. In reviewing claims of…

People v. Wall

The mere fact that counsel did not engage in some pretrial procedures does not by itself result in a finding…