| People v Thomas |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 00231 [58 AD3d 645] |
| January 13, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v TyrieThomas, Appellant. |
—[*1] Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Ann Bordley ofcounsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrus, J.),rendered February 21, 2007, convicting him of murder in the second degree, manslaughter in thefirst degree, and attempted robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposingsentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the People improperly failed to provide him with noticepursuant to CPL 710.30 (1) of a pretrial identification procedure involving a witness who madean in-court identification of him. However, since the proof of the defendant's guilt wasoverwhelming, and since there is no significant probability that the People's failure to providenotice pursuant to CPL 710.30 (1) contributed to the defendant's convictions, any errorconcerning the People's failure to provide notice pursuant to CPL 710.30 (1) was harmless(see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 242 [1975]; People v Peterkin, 245AD2d 1050, 1050-1051 [1997]).
To the extent that the defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is predicatedupon matter dehors the record, the claim may not be reviewed on direct appeal (see People v Monroe, 52 AD3d623 [2008]; People v Brisman,51 AD3d 685 [2008]; People vPotts, 49 AD3d 782, 783 [2008]). To the extent that the claim can be reviewed, thedefendant received meaningful representation (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708,712 [1998]; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 144-147 [1981]; People v Gonzalez, 22 AD3d 597[2005]).[*2]
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see Peoplev Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]; see also People v Taylor, 155 AD2d 630, 630-631[1989]). Spolzino, J.P., Covello, Balkin and Belen, JJ., concur.