From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Boisseau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 20, 1993
193 A.D.2d 517 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

May 20, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Michael A. Corriero, J.).


While the trial court should have announced its intention to consider lesser included offenses prior to the commencement of summations (CPL 300.10), the error was rendered harmless by the opportunity given defense counsel to begin his summation anew after the charge conference. Indeed, asked by the court if he needed additional time to prepare his summation because of the submission of lesser included offenses, defense counsel stated that he did not, and that his argument would remain basically the same (see, People v Trail, 172 A.D.2d 320, 320-321, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 975). Defendant's argument that he was not provided with Rosario material is without merit, since the material in question was duplicated by other material turned over to defendant, and, moreover, was not prepared by a witness for the prosecution.

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Kupferman, Asch and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Boisseau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 20, 1993
193 A.D.2d 517 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

People v. Boisseau

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. TIMOTHY BOISSEAU…

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

Date published: May 20, 1993

Citations

193 A.D.2d 517 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
598 N.Y.S.2d 454

Citing Cases

People v. Watson

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Frank Torres, J.). Defendant's brief detention in the vicinity…

PEOPLE v. LUGO

The theory of the defense on summation was that the victims were not credible, "a theory that applies equally…