claim using standard in New York

2026"Where, as here, a defendant contends that [they were] denied the right to effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by both the Federal and New York State Constitutions, we evaluate the claim using the state standard, which affords greater protection than its federal counterpart" ( People v Conway , 148 AD3d 1739, 1741 [4th Dept 2017], lv denied 29 NY3d 1077 [2017]; see People v Stultz , 2 NY3d 277, 282-284 [2004], rearg denied 3 NY3d 702 [2004]).

2025"Where, as here, a defendant contends that they received ineffective assistance of counsel under both the Federal and New York State Constitutions, [this Court] evaluate[s] the claim using the state standard, which affords greater protection than its federal counterpart" ( People v Mastin , 232 AD3d 1268 , 1269 [4th Dept 2024], lv denied 42 NY3d 1053 [2024] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Stultz , 2 NY3d 277, 282 [2004], rearg denied 3 NY3d 702 [2004]; People v Conway , 148 AD3d 1739, 1741 [4th Dept 2017], lv denied 29 NY3d 1077 [2017]).

2026Under the state standard, "[s]o 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, 147 [1981]; see People v Kates , 162 AD3d 1627 , 1631 [4th Dept 2018], lv denied 32 NY3d 1065 [2018], reconsideration denied 32 NY3d 1173 [2019]).

2025Under the state standard, if "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, 147 [1981]). " '[A] simple disagreement with strategies, tactics or the scope of possible cross-examination, weighed long after trial, does not suffice' " to demonstrate that a defendant was deprived of a fair trial by less than meaningful representation ( Mastin , 232 AD3d at 1269, quoting People

2026"Where, as here, a defendant contends that [they were] denied the right to effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by both the Federal and New York State Constitutions, we evaluate the claim using the state standard, which affords greater protection than its federal counterpart" ( People v Conway , 148 AD3d 1739, 1741 [4th Dept 2017], lv denied 29 NY3d 1077 [2017]; see People v Stultz , 2 NY3d 277, 282-284 [2004], rearg denied 3 NY3d 702 [2004]).

2025"Where, as here, a defendant contends that they received ineffective assistance of counsel under both the Federal and New York State Constitutions, [this Court] evaluate[s] the claim using the state standard, which affords greater protection than its federal counterpart" ( People v Mastin , 232 AD3d 1268 , 1269 [4th Dept 2024], lv denied 42 NY3d 1053 [2024] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Stultz , 2 NY3d 277, 282 [2004], rearg denied 3 NY3d 702 [2004]; People v Conway , 148 AD3d 1739, 1741 [4th Dept 2017], lv denied 29 NY3d 1077 [2017]).

2026"Where, as here, a defendant contends that [they were] denied the right to effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by both the Federal and New York State Constitutions, we evaluate the claim using the state standard, which affords greater protection than its federal counterpart" ( People v Conway , 148 AD3d 1739, 1741 [4th Dept 2017], lv denied 29 NY3d 1077 [2017]; see People v Stultz , 2 NY3d 277, 282-284 [2004], rearg denied 3 NY3d 702 [2004]).

2025"Where, as here, a defendant contends that they received ineffective assistance of counsel under both the Federal and New York State Constitutions, [this Court] evaluate[s] the claim using the state standard, which affords greater protection than its federal counterpart" ( People v Mastin , 232 AD3d 1268 , 1269 [4th Dept 2024], lv denied 42 NY3d 1053 [2024] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Stultz , 2 NY3d 277, 282 [2004], rearg denied 3 NY3d 702 [2004]; People v Conway , 148 AD3d 1739, 1741 [4th Dept 2017], lv denied 29 NY3d 1077 [2017]).

2020Under the state standard, "[s]o 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, 147 [1981]; see People v Benevento , 91 NY2d 708, 712 [1998]).

2018Under the state standard, "[s]o 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, 147 [1981]; see People v Benevento , 91 NY2d 708, 712 [1998]).

2017Where, as here, a defendant contends that he or she was denied the right to effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by both the Federal and New York State Constitutions, we evaluate the claim using the state standard, which affords greater protection than its federal counterpart (see People v Stultz, 2 NY3d 277, 282 [2004], rearg denied 3 NY3d 702 [2004]; Conway, 118 AD3d at 1291 ; People v Ross, 118 AD3d 1413, 1415-1416 [2014], lv denied 24 NY3d 964 [2014]).

2017Where, as here, a defendant contends that he or she was denied the right to effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by both the Federal and New York State Constitutions, we evaluate the claim using the state standard, which affords greater protection than its federal counterpart (see People v Stultz, 2 NY3d 277, 282 [2004], rearg denied 3 NY3d 702 [2004]; Conway, 118 AD3d at 1291 ; People v Ross, 118 AD3d 1413, 1415-1416 [2014], lv denied 24 NY3d 964 [2014]).

2025Under the state standard, if "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, 147 [1981]). " '[A] simple disagreement with strategies, tactics or the scope of possible cross-examination, weighed long after trial, does not suffice' " to demonstrate that a defendant was deprived of a fair trial by less than meaningful representation ( Mastin , 232 AD3d at 1269, quoting People

2025"In New York, the standard for effective assistance is 'meaningful representation' by counsel" ( People v Debellis , 40 NY3d 431 , 436 [2023]; see People v Caban , 5 NY3d 143, 155-156 [2005]; People v Baldi , 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]).

2025"In New York, the standard for an ineffective assistance of counsel claim is whether the defendant was afforded 'meaningful representation' and, while significant, the prejudice component of an ineffective assistance claim is not necessarily indispensable" ( People v Bank , 28 NY3d 131, 137 [2016]; see People v Baldi , 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]; People v Oliver , 162 AD3d 1722 , 1723 [4th Dept 2018]).