People v. Alligood, 413 KA 09-01473.
| Decision Date | 06 May 2016 |
| Docket Number | 413 KA 09-01473. |
| Citation | 29 N.Y.S.3d 841 (Mem),139 A.D.3d 1398,2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 03636 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. David ALLIGOOD, Defendant–Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
139 A.D.3d 1398
29 N.Y.S.3d 841 (Mem)
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 03636
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
David ALLIGOOD, Defendant–Appellant.
413 KA 09-01473.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
May 6, 2016.
Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (John J. Connell, J.), rendered May 8, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.
Trevett Cristo Salzer & Andolina P.C., Rochester (Eric M. Dolan of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant.
Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Leah R. Mervine of Counsel), for Respondent.
MEMORANDUM:
On appeal from a judgment convicting him following a jury trial of, inter alia, criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.39[1] ), defendant contends that he was deprived of effective assistance of counsel because his trial attorney waived his right to a Wade hearing that County Court had ordered with respect to the photo array identification of him by an undercover police officer. As a preliminary matter, we note that it is not clear from the record whether the court granted defendant a Wade hearing; the court merely stated that, because defense counsel was not yet in a position to concede that the identification of defendant was confirmatory, as the People had argued,
“we will have an identification hearing.” It is therefore possible that the court intended merely to conduct a Rodriguez hearing to determine whether the identification was confirmatory (see People v. Rodriguez, 79 N.Y.2d 445, 449–450, 583 N.Y.S.2d 814, 593 N.E.2d 268 ; People v. Green, 70 A.D.3d 1392, 1392, 894 N.Y.S.2d 788 ). Moreover, there is no evidence in the record that defense counsel “waived” defendant's right to a suppression hearing. Although...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Edwards
...outside the record and therefore must be raised by way of a motion pursuant to CPL article 440 (see generally People v. Alligood, 139 A.D.3d 1398, 1398, 29 N.Y.S.3d 841 ). To the extent that we are able to review defendant's contention that he was denied effective assistance of counsel base......
- People v. Brooks
- People v. Paul