People v. Brown

N.Y.

Court: New York Court of Appeals

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

Decision Date: 10/19/1978

Jurisdiction: NY

Bluebook Citation: People v. Brown, 45 N.Y.2d 852, 410 N.Y.S.2d 287, 382 N.E.2d 1149, 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 2281 (1978)

More Cases: N.Y. decisions from 1978

Citation analytics

How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

★Landmark AuthorityTop 1% most-cited · cited by 342 decisions

342

Citing decisions

Authorities cited

Courts citing

Citations by decade

167

1970s1980s1990s2000s2010s2020s

Courts citing this case

N.Y. App. Div.283

N.Y.11

S.D.N.Y.10

2d Cir.9

NY7

N.Y. Sup. Ct.5

Most recently cited by10

2024People v. Banyai (Daniel) N.Y. App. Term.
2024People v. Hayward NY
2023Daniels v. Royce E.D.N.Y
2023Morrow v. Capra E.D.N.Y
2023Hansen v. Johnson E.D.N.Y
2023Legree v. Thompson W.D.N.Y.
2020The People v. Justin Hymes NY
2020People v. Marconi (Joseph) N.Y. App. Term.
2020People v. Perrone-Maple (Marcello) N.Y. App. Term.
2020The People v. Robert Maffei NY

Cites 3 cases

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.

Opinion

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Larry Brown, Appellant.

Attorneys

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Daniel M. Ross and William E. Hellerstein for appellant.
Mario Merola, District Attorney (Leonard G. Kamlet and Alan D. Marrus of counsel), for respondent.

majority

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 typical 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.