People v. EdsallPeople v. Edsall
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of robbery in the first degree (
We reject the further contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel (see generally People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]). “Speculation that a more vigorous cross-examination might have [undermined the credibility of a witness] does not establish ineffectiveness of counsel” (People v Adams, 247 AD2d 819, 819 [1998], lv denied 91 NY2d 1004 [1998]; see generally People v Turner, 5 NY3d 476, 480 [2005]). Contrary to the further contentions of defendant, the conviction is supported by legally sufficient evidence (see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]), and the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. We have considered defendant‘s remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. Present—Hurlbutt, J.P., Martoche, Smith, Fahey and Peradotto, JJ.