Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Mark Smith, Also Known as David Early, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1993-09-02
Citations: 82 N.Y.2d 731
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Mark Smith, Also Known as David Early, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 82
Pages: 731–733

Head Matter:
[621 NE2d 689, 602 NYS2d 322]
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Mark Smith, Also Known as David Early, Appellant.
Decided September 2, 1993
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Lawrence A. Vogelman, New York City, Barry C. Scheck and Ellen Yaroshefsky for appellant.
Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney of New York County, New York City (Donna Krone of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. For the reasons stated by the majority at the Appellate Division, we reject defendant's argument that the trial court's inquiry pertaining to his request for new counsel was inadequate. Under the circumstances here, we conclude that no further inquiry was required. Moreover, we find no merit in defen dant's contention that his attorney provided inadequate representation. Counsel's decision not to call a witness, whose testimony he assessed as weak, was a strategic legal decision which does not amount to ineffective assistance of counsel (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 150-152). Finally, defendant's arguments concerning the prosecutor's summation are merit-less. The statements complained of constituted nothing more than permissible references to the absence of credible testimony supporting defendant's alibi defense (see, People v Allen, 121 AD2d 453, 454, affd 69 NY2d 915).
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Hancock, Jr., Bellacosa and Smith concur.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.