Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Rashawn Blakes, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2017-08-02
Citations: 153 A.D.3d 549
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rashawn Blakes, Appellant.
Judges: Mastro, J.P., Rivera, Hall and Maltese, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 153
Pages: 549–549

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rashawn Blakes, Appellant.
[56 NYS3d 891]

Opinion:
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Chun, J.), rendered April 7, 2014, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel merely because counsel failed to object to certain alleged errors at trial. Rather, the record as a whole demonstrates that counsel made cogent arguments, engaged in searching cross-examination, presented a reasoned theory of defense, and advocated effectively for the defendant, thereby providing him with meaningful representation (see People v Caban, 5 NY3d 143 [2005]; People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708 [1998]; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137 [1981]; People v Martin, 141 AD3d 734 [2016]; People v Belle, 113 AD3d 630 [2014]).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Romero, 7 NY3d 911 [2006]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]; People v Forde, 140 AD3d 1085 [2016]; People v Fitzgerald, 120 AD3d 506 [2014]), and we decline to reach them in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.
Mastro, J.P., Rivera, Hall and Maltese, JJ., concur.