Legal Opinion
People v. Sceravino
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 2, 2008PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the record contains nothing to warrant the conclusion that he was deprived of his constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel, which resulted in his consenting to a level two sex offender designation (see generally People v Carey, 47 AD3d 1079 [2008]; see also People v Costas, 46 AD3d 475 [2007]). Mastro, J.E, Rivera, Fisher and Eng, JJ., concur.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People v. CareyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- People v. CostasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
3Cited by2 opinions
- People v. BowlesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. KinlockAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009