The People v. Mark A. Hartle

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the lower courts, holding that the summary denial of the appellant’s CPL 440 motion was not an abuse of discretion because the alleged “newly discovered” evidence was neither new nor obtained with due diligence, and that the appellant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was meritless. The dissent argued for a hearing on the new‑evidence claim, but it did not affect the majority’s decision.