New York Court of Appeals, 1978

People v. Brown

New York Court of Appeals · Decided October 19, 1978

45 N.Y.2d 852; 382 N.E.2d 1149; 410 N.Y.S.2d 287; 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 2281

Cases that cite this one

415 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

United States Ex Rel. LaSalle v. Smith (District Court, E.D. New York 1986)
Walker v. Dalsheim (District Court, S.D. New York 1987)
People v. Lopez-Mendoza (N.Y. 2019)
People v. Taylor (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
People v. Smith (N.Y. 2017)
Murden v. Artuz (2d Cir. 2007)
Powers v. Lord (District Court, W.D. New York 2006)
David Sweet v. Floyd Bennett, Superintendent of Elmira Correctional Institution (2d Cir. 2003)
People v. Medina-Gonzalez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
People v. Medina-Gonzalez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
People v. Benevento (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
People v. Garcia (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1989)
The People v. Robert Maffei (N.Y. 2020)
The People v. Jaime Lopez-Mendoza (N.Y. 2019)
People v. Sposito (N.Y. 2018)
People v. Taylor (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
People v. Dwight Smith (N.Y. 2017)
People v. Campbell (N.Y. 2017)
Bruno v. Superintendent, Five Points Correctional Facility (2d Cir. 2016)
Pierotti v. Walsh (2d Cir. 2016)
The People v. Kharye Jarvis (N.Y. 2015)
Fulton v. Graham (2d Cir. 2015)
Contant v. Sabol (District Court, S.D. New York 2013)
Daryl Graham v. Leonard Portuondo (2d Cir. 2011)
People v. Konstantinides (N.Y. 2009)

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order of the Appellate Division reversed and new trial ordered. The record, unlike as in most "ineffective counsel” cases, demonstrates beyond cavil that defendant was lacking effective counsel throughout the prosecution against him. For whatever reason, despite undoubtedly sincere efforts on his part, assigned defense counsel failed to protect the interests of his client. The result of reversal is unfortunate since the guilt of defendant was, and even with effective counsel most likely would have been, established by overwhelming evidence. Nevertheless, defendant was entitled to a fair trial represented by effective counsel. (See, e.g., People v Droz, 39 NY2d 457, 462, and cases cited; People v Bennett, 29 NY2d 462, 465-467.) Generally, the ineffectiveness of counsel is not demonstrable on the main record, but in this case it is. Consequently, in the *854typical case it would be better, and in some cases essential, that an appellate attack on the effectiveness of counsel be bottomed on an evidentiary exploration by collateral or post-conviction proceeding brought under CPL 440.10 (cf. People v Brown, 28 NY2d 282, 286-287).

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.

Order reversed, etc.

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