From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. McCloud

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 5, 2003
305 A.D.2d 428 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2000-05808

Submitted April 10, 2003.

May 5, 2003.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), rendered June 9, 2000, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (Gregory J. Neilon of counsel), for appellant.

Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Marcia R. Kucera of counsel), for respondent.

Before: ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P., HOWARD MILLER, THOMAS A. ADAMS, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.


DECISION ORDER ON MOTION

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the Supreme Court erred in refusing to give a missing witness charge with respect to a police detective to whom the defendant made a statement. Because the defendant waited until both sides had rested to request his charge, the request was untimely and thus, properly denied (see People v. Gonzalez, 68 N.Y.2d 424; People v. Catoe, 181 A.D.2d 905).

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the determination as to whether to reopen a case for further testimony rests within the sound discretion of the trial court (see People v. Ventura, 35 N.Y.2d 654; People v. Aldridge, 247 A.D.2d 545; People v. Fama, 212 A.D.2d 542). Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's application to reopen the case.

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

FLORIO, J.P., H. MILLER, ADAMS and RIVERA, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. McCloud

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 5, 2003
305 A.D.2d 428 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. McCloud

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. RICHARD McCLOUD, appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 5, 2003

Citations

305 A.D.2d 428 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
758 N.Y.S.2d 516

Citing Cases

People v. Zamfino

Moreover, the court properly instructed the jury regarding alibi witnesses (seePeople v. Dawson, 50 N.Y.2d at…

People v. Williams

“Absent a compelling reason, the order of trial prescribed by CPL 260.30 should be followed” (People v. Fama,…