Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012

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

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

People v. Gillespie (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
People v. Gillespie (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

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.