People v. Strempack

May 31, 1988
Versions:71 N.Y.2d 1015
525 N.E.2d 746
530 N.Y.S.2d 100
1988 N.Y. LEXIS 1004

*1016 OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defense counsel’s failure to make a suppression motion prior to negotiating a plea bargain for his client does not, on this record, constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. Although defendant might have prevailed on such a motion, success was by no means certain. Had the suppression motion been denied, it is doubtful that the favorable bargain counsel obtained for defendant would still have been available. Thus, defense counsel’s representation was consistent with a legitimate and ultimately successful strategy (see, People v Benn, 68 NY2d 941, 942; People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705).

Defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit.

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.