From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Roacher

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 3, 2007
39 A.D.3d 569 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 2003-00882.

April 3, 2007.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Cooperman, J.), rendered January 6, 2003, convicting him of murder in the second degree, attempted robbery in the first degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Robert DiDio, Kew Gardens, N.Y., for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Nicoletta J. Caferri, and Laura T. Ross of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Prudenti, P.J., Fisher, Carni and McCarthy, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Because the People produced clear and convincing evidence that the defendant procured the unavailability of the codefendant Maurice Gulley through threats of violence, the Supreme Court properly permitted Gulley's grand jury testimony to be introduced into evidence at trial ( see People v Geraci, 85 NY2d 359, 365).

In light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt, which included the defendant's written and videotaped statements admitting participation in the robbery during which the victim was killed, the remaining trial errors alleged were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt ( see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230).


Summaries of

People v. Roacher

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 3, 2007
39 A.D.3d 569 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

People v. Roacher

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMEEK ROACHER…

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

Date published: Apr 3, 2007

Citations

39 A.D.3d 569 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 2961
835 N.Y.S.2d 219

Citing Cases

People v. Dubarry

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court correctly admitted the grand jury testimony of an…

People v. Breazil

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the court properly determined, after a Sirois hearing ( see People v.…