From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Esquilin

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 11, 1998
691 N.E.2d 1024 (N.Y. 1998)

Opinion

Argued January 13, 1998

Decided February 11, 1998

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department.

Florian Miedel, New York City, Rosemary Herbert and Richard M. Greenberg for appellant.

Robert M Morgenthau, District Attorney of New York County, New York City ( William McGuire and Sylvia Wertheimer of counsel), for respondent.



MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

As there was evidence to support the lower courts' determination that the police possessed a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity justifying the pursuit of defendant ( see, People v Sierra, 83 N.Y.2d 928), the issue is beyond this Court's further review.

Defendant's remaining contention that the trial court violated CPL 310.30 by failing to properly respond to a jury question is without merit.

Chief Judge KAYE and Judges TITONE, BELLACOSA, SMITH, LEVINE, CIPARICK and WESLEY concur.

Order affirmed, in a memorandum.


Summaries of

People v. Esquilin

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 11, 1998
691 N.E.2d 1024 (N.Y. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Esquilin

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent v. JOSE ESQUILIN, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Feb 11, 1998

Citations

691 N.E.2d 1024 (N.Y. 1998)
691 N.E.2d 1024
653 N.Y.S.2d 567

Citing Cases

People v. Woods

While the trial court possesses some discretion in framing its answer, "it must respond meaningfully to the…

People v. Torres

We conclude, however, that defendant's contention is without merit. The court appropriately answered the…