People v. Torrence
| Decision Date | 18 December 1987 |
| Citation | 523 N.Y.S.2d 265,135 A.D.2d 1075 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James TORRENCE, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Rose H. Sconiers, Buffalo by Kristin Preve, for appellant.
Richard J. Arcara, Buffalo by Louis Haremski, for respondent.
Before DILLON, P.J., and DOERR, GREEN, BALIO and DAVIS, JJ.
Defendant contends that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to make any pretrial motion (1) to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds pursuant to CPL 30.30, (2) to suppress eyewitness identification testimony, (3) to suppress a statement made by defendant, and (4) for discovery. No claim is advanced that counsel's representation during trial was inadequate, and we perceive no basis for such a claim.
We are persuaded that a dismissal motion on speedy trial grounds, if made, would not have been successful ( see, People v. Sinistaj, 67 N.Y.2d 236, 501 N.Y.S.2d 793, 492 N.E.2d 1209; People v. McBride, 126 Misc.2d 272, 482 N.Y.S.2d 203; People v. White, 115 Misc.2d 800, 454 N.Y.S.2d 792). The trial record fails to demonstrate that counsel's failure to make other pretrial motions prejudiced his defense at trial. Counsel aggressively cross-examined the eyewitnesses regarding their inability to identify defendant positively from photographs as well as other circumstances pertaining to their identification. Both witnesses gave a reasonable explanation for their inability to identify defendant positively from photographs, and their trial testimony was strong and unequivocal. The trial record reveals that defendant's inculpatory statement was given spontaneously during a conversation initiated by defendant. Although counsel made no discovery motions, there is no proof that he failed to undertake an adequate investigation of facts or that he was unprepared for trial ( see, People v. Droz, 39 N.Y.2d 457, 462, 384 N.Y.S.2d 404, 348 N.E.2d 880; People v. LaBree, 34 N.Y.2d 257, 260, 357 N.Y.S.2d 412, 313 N.E.2d 730). The mere fact that pretrial motions were not made does not indicate ineffective assistance of counsel ( People v. Taylor, 105 A.D.2d 814, 481 N.Y.S.2d 444; People v. Bonk, 83 A.D.2d 695, 442 N.Y.S.2d 281). The trial record fails to establish that defendant suffered any prejudice as a result of counsel's pretrial inactivity, and we cannot conclude from the record before us that he was deprived of meaningful...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Carver
...reject it here. In our view, the rule articulated in Bassett and its antecedent and descendent cases is rooted in People v. Torrence , 135 A.D.2d 1075, 1076, 523 N.Y.S.2d 265, lv. denied 70 N.Y.2d 1011, 526 N.Y.S.2d 946, 521 N.E.2d 1089, wherein we rejected the defendant's contention that h......
-
People v. Carver
...reject it here. In our view, the rule articulated in Bassett and its antecedent and descendent cases is rooted in People v. Torrence, 135 A.D.2d 1075, 1076, 523 N.Y.S.2d 265, lv. denied 70 N.Y.2d 1011, 526 N.Y.S.2d 946, 521 N.E.2d 1089, wherein we rejected the defendant's contention that he......
- Savino v. Robertson, 1-93-1801
-
People v. Ayala
...to provide meaningful representation (see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400; People v. Torrence, 135 A.D.2d 1075, 1076, 523 N.Y.S.2d 265, lv. denied 70 N.Y.2d 1011, 526 N.Y.S.2d 946, 521 N.E.2d 1089). There is no merit to the contention that the sentence......