People v. Giannattasio
| Decision Date | 27 January 1997 |
| Citation | 653 N.Y.S.2d 862,235 A.D.2d 548 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Gregory GIANNATTASIO, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
N. Scott Banks, Garden City, for appellant.
Denis Dillon, District Attorney, Mineola (Bruce E. Whitney and Lawrence J. Schwarz, of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Harrington, J.), rendered June 7, 1993, convicting him of robbery in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, and criminal possession of a hypodermic instrument, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
There is no merit to the defendant's contention that his trial counsel's failure to request an intoxication charge constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must demonstrate that under the particular facts of his case he was denied "meaningful representation" (People v. Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705, 709, 530 N.Y.S.2d 52, 525 N.E.2d 698; People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 146, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400). While an intoxication charge should be given if there is sufficient evidence of intoxication in the record for a reasonable person to entertain a doubt as to the element of intent on that basis (see, People v. Perry, 61 N.Y.2d 849, 473 N.Y.S.2d 966, 462 N.E.2d 143; People v. Rodriguez, 76 N.Y.2d 918, 563 N.Y.S.2d 48, 564 N.E.2d 658), the evidence of intoxication at bar was insufficient to warrant such a charge (see, People v. Gaines, 83 N.Y.2d 925, 615 N.Y.S.2d 309, 638 N.E.2d 954; People v. Watson, 205 A.D.2d 398, 613 N.Y.S.2d 613). Accordingly, the defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel.
To continue reading
Request your trial