SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE DIVISION SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
June 23, 2009
THE PEOPLE, ETC., RESPONDENT,
RONALD PRESCOTT, APPELLANT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.), rendered May 17, 2006, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
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.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, ARIEL E. BELEN and LEONARD B. AUSTIN, JJ.
(Ind. No. 935/05)
DECISION & ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not deprived of effective assistance of counsel (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712). "The record in this case demonstrates that defense counsel effectively cross-examined the People's witnesses, presented an alibi defense, and made competent opening and closing statements which were consistent with that defense" (People v Pollard, 220 AD2d 463, 464; see People v Ryan, 90 NY2d 822, 823-824; People v Velez, 197 AD2d 651, 652; People v Ortiz, 174 AD2d 763, 763). Moreover, the "defendant has failed to demonstrate the absence of strategic or other legitimate explanations for counsel's alleged shortcomings" (People v Taylor, 1 NY3d 174, 176 [internal quotations omitted]; see People v Williams, 59 AD3d 576; People v Ramjit, 59 AD3d 466; People v Demolaire, 55 AD3d 621, 622; People v Coleman, 37 AD3d 489, 490). Accordingly, "[the] defendant has failed to establish that he was denied his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel" (People v Ryan, 90 NY2d 822, 824; see People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 708-709).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).
RIVERA, J.P., FLORIO, BELEN and AUSTIN, JJ., concur.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.