People v. Vasquez

• Decision Date: 18 August 2021
• Docket Number: 2021-04724,Ind. 3293/10
• Parties: The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Abraham Angel Vasquez, also known as Juan Velazquez, appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court

The People of the State of New York, respondent,
v.
Abraham Angel Vasquez, also known as Juan Velazquez, appellant.

No. 2021-04724

Ind. No. 3293/10

Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

August 18, 2021

Motion by the appellant for leave to reargue an application for a writ of error coram nobis, which was determined by decision and order of this Court dated December 30, 2020.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition and in relation thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion for leave to reargue is granted, and, upon reargument, the decision and order of this Court dated December 30, 2020, is recalled and vacated, and the following decision and order is substituted therefor:

Janet E. Sabel, New York, NY (David Crow and Friedman Kaplan Seiler & Adelman LLP [Eric Corngold and Anil K. Vassanji], of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se.

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Amy Appelbaum of counsel), for respondent.

Patricia Pazner, New York, NY (A. Alexander Donn of counsel), former appellate counsel.

LEONARD B. AUSTIN, J.P., VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

DECISION & ORDERON MOTION

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated January 17, 2018 (People v Vasquez, 157 A.D.3d 832), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Neil Jon Firetog, J.), rendered December 1, 2011. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated December 11, 2018, the appellant was granted leave to serve and file a brief on the issue of whether there was error in connection with the handling of two jury notes under People v O'Rama (78 N.Y.2d 270), and the application was held in abeyance in the interim. The parties have now filed their respective briefs. Justice Christopher has been substituted for former Justice Balkin (see 22 NYCRR 1250.1[b]).

ORDERED that the application is denied.

The defendant argues that he was deprived of the...