People v David Smith

Annotate this Case
People v Smith 2004 NY Slip Op 08895 [12 AD3d 707] November 29, 2004 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, January 19, 2005

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v
David Smith, Appellant.

—[*1]Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), rendered May 1, 2002, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not denied the effective assistance of counsel. Viewing the record as a whole, we conclude that the defendant received meaningful representation (see People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137 [1981]). The defense counsel presented a reasonable defense, interposed appropriate objections, and effectively cross-examined witnesses (see People v Wright, 8 AD3d 507, 508 [2004]; People v Washington, 5 AD3d 615 [2004]). Unsuccessful trial strategies and tactics do not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel (see People v Henry, 95 NY2d 563, 566 [2000]). Smith, J.P., Crane, Mastro and Skelos, JJ., concur.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.