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

  1. People v. CareyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
  2. People v. CostasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People v. BowlesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
  2. People v. KinlockAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009