People v. Wade

Summary

The Appellate Division, First Department, modified the defendant's sentence and commitment sheet to clarify that the kidnapping sentence was consecutive only to the intentional murder sentence, and otherwise affirmed the judgment. The court upheld the denial of suppression of statements made in the hospital, the denial of defendant's request for new counsel, and the conviction for second-degree kidnapping. It also rejected or declined to review the ineffective-assistance claim and found the evidence legally sufficient and the sentences proper.

Holdings

1. The denial of suppression was proper because defendant's hospital statements were voluntary and followed a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of Miranda rights; the statements were also sufficiently attenuated from the earlier un-Mirandized statement.
2. Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying defendant's request for new counsel because her generalized and conclusory complaint did not contain specific allegations requiring even a minimal inquiry.
3. The ineffective-assistance claim was unreviewable on direct appeal to the extent it involved matters outside the record and had to be raised in a CPL 440.10 motion; alternatively, the record showed effective assistance under state and federal standards.
4. The evidence was legally sufficient to establish that defendant abducted the victim's newborn, and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence.
5. Consecutive sentences were properly imposed for second-degree kidnapping and intentional second-degree murder because the offenses arose from separate and distinct acts, even though they occurred during a continuous incident.

Questions Presented

1. Whether defendant's hospital statements were voluntary, followed a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of Miranda rights, and were sufficiently attenuated from an earlier un-Mirandized statement.
2. Whether Supreme Court abused its discretion by denying defendant's request for new counsel.
3. Whether defendant's ineffective-assistance claim was reviewable on direct appeal and, to the extent reviewable, whether counsel was constitutionally effective.
4. Whether the evidence was legally sufficient and the verdict was against the weight of the evidence on the second-degree kidnapping count.
5. Whether consecutive sentences were properly imposed for second-degree kidnapping and intentional second-degree murder.

Disposition

affirmed