PEOPLE v. CASTILLO, 29 N.Y.3d 935 (2017)
Court: Court of Appeals of New York
Number: innyco20170323292
Visitors: 24
Filed: Mar. 23, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 23, 2017
Summary: OPINION OF THE COURT MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed in each case. Codefendants Elmer Castillo and Brian Degraffenreid appeal from orders of the Appellate Division affirming their convictions for manslaughter in the first degree. Co-defendants' challenge to the trial court's general charge on causation is unpreserved, and there was no mode of proceedings error ( see People v Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10 , 19 [1995]; see also People v Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467 , 472 [1
Summary: OPINION OF THE COURT MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed in each case. Codefendants Elmer Castillo and Brian Degraffenreid appeal from orders of the Appellate Division affirming their convictions for manslaughter in the first degree. Co-defendants' challenge to the trial court's general charge on causation is unpreserved, and there was no mode of proceedings error ( see People v Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10 , 19 [1995]; see also People v Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467 , 472 [19..
More
OPINION OF THE COURT
MEMORANDUM.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed in each case. Codefendants Elmer Castillo and Brian Degraffenreid appeal from orders of the Appellate Division affirming their convictions for manslaughter in the first degree. Co-defendants' challenge to the trial court's general charge on causation is unpreserved, and there was no mode of proceedings error (see People v Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19 [1995]; see also People v Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467, 472 [1980]; People v Patterson, 39 N.Y.2d 288, 295 [1976]). In addition, defense counsel's failure to object to the charge does not constitute ineffective assistance, as the jury instructions, viewed in totality, neither improperly shifted the burden to codefendants nor relieved the People of their burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see Thomas, 50 NY2d at 472; see also People v Drake, 7 N.Y.3d 28, 33-34 [2006]). Additionally, codefendants' remaining ineffective assistance of counsel claims are without merit as both codefendants received meaningful representation (see People v Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147 [1981]; see also People v Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 714 [1998]; People v Mahboubian, 74 N.Y.2d 174, 183-184 [1989]; People v Stultz, 2 N.Y.3d 277, 287 [2004]).
In each case: On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, in a memorandum.
Source: Leagle
