Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012

People v. Gillespie

People v. Gillespie
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided July 18, 2012
97 A.D.3d 763; 947 N.Y.2d 914
People v. Gillespie

Opinion of the Court

The defendant’s contentions regarding certain comments made by the prosecutor on summation are unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Utley, 45 NY2d 908, 910 [1978]), and we decline to review them in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was not deprived *764of the effective assistance of counsel. Considering the totality of the evidence, the law, and the circumstances of the case, trial counsel provided meaningful representation (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712 [1998]; see also People v Cass, 18 NY3d 553, 564 [2012]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Skelos, J.P., Dillon, Leventhal and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.