From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Blackburn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 28, 1995
214 A.D.2d 943 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

April 28, 1995

Appeal from the Monroe County Court, Connell, J.

Present — Denman, P.J., Lawton, Wesley, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him of robbery in the first degree and petit larceny arising out of an incident in which he threatened store employees with a knife in order to escape apprehension for shoplifting. Defendant was sentenced as a second felony offender to a term of imprisonment of 8 to 16 years. We conclude that the photographic and lineup identification procedures were not unnecessarily suggestive. Further, we conclude that County Court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to strike the Wade testimony of the officer as a sanction for destruction of his notes. The officer did not fail to exercise due care in routinely destroying his notes after incorporating the information into his official report (see, People v Wallace, 76 N.Y.2d 953, 955; People v Martinez, 71 N.Y.2d 937, 940; People v Hyde, 172 A.D.2d 305, 306, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 1077). The notes were the duplicative equivalent of the report, which was turned over to the defense (see, People v Banch, 80 N.Y.2d 610, 616-617; People v Consolazio, 40 N.Y.2d 446, 454, cert denied 433 U.S. 914). Finally, we conclude that defendant's sentence is not harsh or excessive.


Summaries of

People v. Blackburn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 28, 1995
214 A.D.2d 943 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Blackburn

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. FRANK BLACKBURN…

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

Date published: Apr 28, 1995

Citations

214 A.D.2d 943 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
626 N.Y.S.2d 604

Citing Cases

People v. Denslow

County Court properly concluded that those statements were voluntary and admissible. Defendant was employed…