You are here: / / Failure to Make Motion for Trial Order of Dismissal Not Ineffective A...
,

Failure to Make Motion for Trial Order of Dismissal Not Ineffective Assistance

In affirming defendant’s conviction, the Fourth Department determined defense counsel’s failure to make a motion for a trial order of dismissal did not amount to ineffective assistance of counsel:

…“[D]efense counsel’s failure to make a specific motion for a trial order of dismissal at the close of the People’s case [does] not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel, inasmuch as any such motion would have had no chance of success” … .  Indeed, we note that defendant does not contend on appeal that the evidence at trial is legally insufficient to support the conviction.  People v Hicks, 1008, 4th Dept 10-4-13

 

You might also like
In Lead Paint Exposure Case, Court’s Order to Provide Medical Report Linking Injuries to Exposure Before Depositions Upheld
REVERSIBLE ERROR TO ALLOW DEFENDANT TO SELECT JUROR, A SELECTION WITH WHICH DEFENSE COUNSEL APPARENTLY DISAGREED.
PLAINTIFF IN THIS MED MAL ACTION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PRECLUDED FROM PRESENTING EVIDENCE DECEDENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN A BLOOD TRANSFUSION ON THE GROUND THE ISSUE WAS NOT PLED AND PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR A MISSING WITNESS JURY INSTRUCTION WHEN THE DEFENSE INDICATED IT WAS NOT GOING TO CALL THREE DEFENDANTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED; DEFENSE VERDICT REVERSED AND NEW TRIAL ORDERED (FOURTH DEPT).
PLAINTIFF SUFFICIENTLY IDENTIFIED THE CAUSE OF HER SLIP AND FALL AND DEFENDANTS FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE A LACK OF CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE OF THE CONDITION; DEFENDANTS’ SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED (FOURTH DEPT). ​
Question of Fact Raised in Rear-End Collision Case
WAIVER OF APPEAL INVALID AND GUILTY PLEA VACATED BECAUSE DEFENDANT WAS NOT INFORMED OF THE PERIOD OF POST-RELEASE SUPERVISION (FOURTH DEPT). ​
DEFENDANT WAS NOT IN CUSTODY WHEN HIS STATEMENTS WERE MADE, SUPPRESSION MOTION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED (FOURTH DEPT).
THE RECORD DID NOT SUPPORT THE AWARD OF PRIMARY PHYSICAL CUSTODY TO MOTHER, FAMILY COURT REVERSED, ALTHOUGH THE CHILD WISHED TO STAY WITH MOTHER, THAT FACTOR WAS AFFORDED LITTLE WEIGHT DUE TO THE CHILD’S YOUNG AGE.

Categories

Sign Up for the Mailing List to Be Notified When the Site Is Updated.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Copyright © 2026 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy

Flawed Jury Instruction Re: Assisted Suicide Affirmative Defense to Murder Required... Trial Judge Should Have Allowed Slightly Late Peremptory Challenge—Conviction...