People v. Santana

Decision Date20 March 1995
Citation624 N.Y.S.2d 920,213 A.D.2d 568
PartiesThe PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Paulino SANTANA, Appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Philip L. Weinstein, New York City (Carrie Lamitie and Jonathan S. Rosenberg, of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Roseann B. MacKechnie, Ruth E. Ross, and Maureen Brinkers, of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered March 25, 1992, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that he was excluded from a material stage of the trial when counsel exercised their challenges to the jury outside of his presence is without merit. The record indicates that the defendant was present during the voir dire, he had an opportunity to consult with his counsel, and the challenges were given effect in his presence when the accepted jurors were sworn in open court (see, People v. Velasco, 77 N.Y.2d 469, 568 N.Y.S.2d 721, 570 N.E.2d 1070; see also, People v. Parks, 210 A.D.2d 437, 620 N.Y.S.2d 978; People v. Kaur, 204 A.D.2d 573, 612 N.Y.S.2d 66; People v. Jackson, 202 A.D.2d 518, 609 N.Y.S.2d 65; People v. Cohen, 201 A.D.2d 494, 607 N.Y.S.2d 374; People v. Williams, 199 A.D.2d 445, 605 N.Y.S.2d 383).

The defendant's further contention that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel is likewise without merit. The evidence, the law, and the circumstances of this case, viewed in totality and as of the time of the representation, establish that the defense counsel provided meaningful representation (see, People v. Flores, 84 N.Y.2d 184, 615 N.Y.S.2d 662, 639 N.E.2d 19; see also, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400; People v. Lewis, 210 A.D.2d 351, 620 N.Y.S.2d 278).

BALLETTA, J.P., and THOMPSON, LAWRENCE and GOLDSTEIN, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • People v. Cobb
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 5 Octubre 2010
    ...contention, "the challenges were given effect in his presence when the accepted jurors were sworn in open court" ( People v. Santana, 213 A.D.2d 568, 568, 624 N.Y.S.2d 920; see People v. Firrira, 258 A.D.2d at 666, 685 N.Y.S.2d 787; People v. Parks, 210 A.D.2d 437, 620 N.Y.S.2d 978; People ......
  • People v. Singh
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 20 Marzo 1995
  • People v. Moton
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 20 Marzo 1995
  • People v. Santana
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 20 Junio 1995

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT