From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Alamo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 29, 1994
202 A.D.2d 349 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

March 29, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Tejada, J.).


Defendant possessed all the information on which he based his request for a missing witness charge upon completion of the testimony of the testifying officer, but delayed making the request until after six additional witnesses had testified, the People and defense had rested, and the defense had made an unsuccessful motion to dismiss the indictment. Defendant's request was therefore properly denied as untimely since it was not made "as soon as practicable" (People v. Gonzalez, 68 N.Y.2d 424, 428). In addition, defendant failed to establish that the uncalled backup team officers would have provided material, noncumulative testimony (supra, at 427).

Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Kupferman, Ross, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Alamo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 29, 1994
202 A.D.2d 349 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Alamo

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JUAN ALAMO, Appellant

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

Date published: Mar 29, 1994

Citations

202 A.D.2d 349 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
609 N.Y.S.2d 227

Citing Cases

People v. Miller

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Franklin Weissberg, J.). The trial court properly denied…

People v. Medina

The court properly denied, as untimely, defendant's request for a missing witness charge as to the arresting…