Treatment trajectory · 1982 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1982
2004
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
The People v. Willie L. Wragg
First, counsel cannot be held ineffective because the People impeached the albi witnesses when they were caught in a lie (see People v Rose, 57 NY2d 837, 839 [1982] [“Defense counsel’s reliance on the testimony of a witness whose credibility was subsequently impeached on cross-examination may have been an inadvisable trial tactic, but it did not constitute ineffective assistance”]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Haas
Rather, an attorney must provide an accused meaningful representation (see, People v Ford, 86 NY2d 397, 404 ; People v Satterfield, 66 NY2d 796 ) and his or her participation in plea discussions is but one factor to consider in assessing whether this standard has been met (see, People v Rose, 57 NY2d 837, 838 [defense counsel’s failure to explore the possibility of plea bargaining does not constitute error as a matter of law]).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Glover
So long as the evidence, the law, and the circumstances of a particular case, viewed in totality and as of the time of the representation, reveal that the attorney provided meaningful representation, the constitutional requirement will have been met.” (People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 146-147 ; see, also, People v Rose, 57 NY2d 837, 839 .) ¶ Of course, the examination of defense counsel’s advocacy under this “meaningful representation” standard is, and must be, at least as critical as the “reasonably competent assistance” formulation now uniformly approved by all Federal Courts of App…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
David Wadler, an Infant, by His Father and Natural Guardian, Gary Wadler
v.
Akiva Wadler, and Ephraim Rubin
v.
Akiva Wadler, and Ephraim Rubin
New York Court of Appeals.
Oct 7, 1982.
442 N.E.2d 61
Published
Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals sua sponte, upon the ground that the stipulation for judgment absolute, under the facts in this case, is illusory and frustrates the purpose of CPLR 5601 (subd [c]) (see Welty v Brown, 42 NY2d 995).
Judge Fuchsberg taking no part.