Majority
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.), rendered June 14, 2005, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s contentions regarding the prosecutor’s reference during his opening statement to a witness who ultimately refused to testify, and regarding the admission of testimony of a detective that, after conducting interviews at the crime scene, he suspected the defendant of committing the murder and that he arrested the defendant after a witness viewed a lineup, are unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Barboza, 24 AD3d 460 , 461 [2005]; People v Boatswain, 8 AD3d 673 , 674 [2004]; People v Thompson, 276 AD2d 811 [2000]).
In any event, the defendant’s claims with respect to the opening statement and the testimony about when the defendant
The defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel. Counsel pursued a viable misidentification defense throughout the trial. Viewing the record as a whole, the defendant received meaningful representation (see People v Henry, 95 NY2d 563 , 566 [2000]; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137 , 147 [1981]).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Schmidt, J.E, Crane, Skelos and Fisher, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. De Tore 34 NY2d 199 at 207 p. 943
- People v. Mobley 56 NY2d 584 at 585 p. 943
- People v. Henry 95 NY2d 563 at 566 p. 943
- People v. Baldi 54 NY2d 137 at 147 p. 943
- People v. Suitte 90 AD2d 80 p. 943