People v. Smith

• Decision Date: 02 September 1993
• Citation: 82 N.Y.2d 731,602 N.Y.S.2d 322
• Parties: , 621 N.E.2d 689 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Mark SMITH, Also Known as David Early, Appellant.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Page 322

602 N.Y.S.2d 322

82 N.Y.2d 731, 621 N.E.2d 689

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Mark SMITH, Also Known as David Early, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Sept. 2, 1993.

[82 N.Y.2d 732] [621 N.E.2d 690] Lawrence A. Vogelman, Barry C. Scheck and Ellen Yaroshefsky, New York City, for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, Dist. Atty. of New York County, New York City (Donna Krone, of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division, 192 A.D.2d 310, 595 N.Y.S.2d 468 should be affirmed. For the reasons stated by the majority at the Appellate Division, we reject defendant's argument that the trial court's inquiry pertaining to his request for new counsel was inadequate. Under the circumstances here, we conclude that no further inquiry was required. Moreover, we find no merit in defendant's contention that his attorney provided inadequate representation. Counsel's decision not to call a witness, whose testimony he assessed as weak, was a strategic legal decision which does not amount to ineffective assistance of counsel ( see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 150-152, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400). Finally, defendant's arguments concerning the prosecutor's summation are meritless. The statements complained of constituted nothing more than permissible references to the absence of credible testimony supporting defendant's alibi defense ( see, People v. Allen, 121 A.D.2d 453, 454, 503 N.Y.S.2d 143, aff'd 69 N.Y.2d 915, 516 N.Y.S.2d 199, 508 N.E.2d 934).

KAYE, C.J., and SIMONS, TITONE, HANCOCK, BELLACOSA and SMITH, JJ., concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.