Majority
Viewed in totality as of the time of representation, we find that the defendant received meaningful representation and the issues raised by the appellant reflect mere disagreement with defense strategies and tactics that failed (see, People v Benn, 68 NY2d 941 , 942; People v Satterfield, 66 NY2d 796 , 799-800; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137 , 146-147, on remand 87 AD2d 843 , appeal after remand 96 AD2d 212 ). The evidence of guilt was overwhelming and counsel’s performance reveals adequate preparation and knowledge of the law throughout the trial (see, People v Benn, supra, at 942 ; People v Aiken, 45 NY2d 394 , 399-400; People v Droz, 39 NY2d 457 , 462). Counsel did not ignore any exculpatory theory or defense or fail to introduce exculpatory evidence or testimony (see, People v Benn, supra; People v Jenkins, 68 NY2d 896 , 898).
We decline to reduce the sentence in the interest of justice (People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 ). We have reviewed the appellant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J. P., Thompson, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Benn 68 NY2d 941 at 942 p. 614
- People v. Satterfield 66 NY2d 796 at 799-800 p. 614
- People v. Baldi 54 NY2d 137 at 146-147 p. 614
- People v. Baldi 87 AD2d 843 p. 614
- People v. Baldi 96 AD2d 212 p. 614
- People v. Aiken 45 NY2d 394 at 399-400 p. 614
- People v. Droz 39 NY2d 457 at 462 p. 614
- People v. Jenkins 68 NY2d 896 at 898 p. 614
- People v. Aphaylath 68 NY2d 945 at 947 p. 615
- Murphy v. Danaher 69 NY2d 724 p. 615
- People v. Danza 127 AD2d 781 p. 615
- People v. Suitte 90 AD2d 80 p. 615