People v Cason

People v Cason 2011 NY Slip Op 09143 Decided on December 13, 2011 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on December 13, 2011
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
MARK C. DILLON, J.P.
RANDALL T. ENG
ARIEL E. BELEN
LEONARD B. AUSTIN, JJ.
2007-04294
(Ind. No. 2608/06)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Tyrel Cason, appellant.




Peter A. Sell, New York, N.Y., for appellant.
Kathleen M. Rice, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Yael V.
Levy, Kelley E. Walsh, and Jessica H.
Zafonte of counsel), for respondent.


DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Carter, J.), rendered April 27, 2007, convicting him of manslaughter in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

"The right to effective assistance of counsel is guaranteed by the Federal and State Constitutions" (People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 708; see US Const Sixth Amend; NY Const, art I, § 6; People v Bowles, ____ AD3d , 2011 NY Slip Op 07826 [2d Dept 2011]). Under the New York State standard for the effective assistance of counsel, "[s]o long as the evidence, the law, and the circumstances of a particular case, viewed in totality and as of the time of the representation, reveal that the attorney provided meaningful representation, the constitutional requirement will have been met" (People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147; see People v Bernardez, 85 AD3d 936, 937, lv denied 17 NY3d 857). Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel. Upon reviewing the record here, we find that counsel provided meaningful representation insofar as he employed "a trial strategy that might well have been pursued by a reasonably competent attorney" (People v Evans, 16 NY3d 571, 575 [internal quotation marks omitted], cert denied __ US __, 132 S Ct 325; see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d at 147; People v Gerrara, 88 AD3d 811). Further, the defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel under the Federal Constitution (see Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Delgado, 80 NY2d 780, 783; People v Mulleavey, 50 AD3d 826, 827; People v Miranda, 213 AD2d 560, 561; People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).
DILLON, J.P., ENG, BELEN and AUSTIN, JJ., concur. [*2]

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court