People v. PickettPeople v. Pickett
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s claim that the Supreme Court failed to conduct a sufficient inquiry of certain jurors to determine whether they were grossly unqualified to serve is unpreserved for appellate review, because the defendant did not object to the sufficiency of the court’s inquiry or request that any further inquiry be made (see
The defendant’s contention that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his trial counsel improperly permitted him to choose whether to move for a mistrial is without merit. The record supports the conclusion that the defendant’s trial counsel made the decision to forgo moving for a mistrial after consulting with him (see People v Colville, 20 NY3d 20, 32 [2012]; People v Butler, 140 AD3d 472, 472-473 [2016]; People v Gottsche, 118 AD3d 1303, 1304-1305 [2014]). Counsel’s representation, viewed in its totality, cannot be considered ineffective (see People v Clark, 28 NY3d 556, 562-563 [2016]). Eng, P.J., Rivera, Balkin and Barros, JJ., concur.