From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Cartledge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 3, 1989
147 A.D.2d 917 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

February 3, 1989

Appeal from the Monroe County Court, Wisner, J.

Present — Callahan, J.P., Denman, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The trial court properly concluded that defendant's statutory right to a speedy trial pursuant to CPL 30.30 was not violated. On indictment 780/83, the People announced their readiness within six months and on indictment 868/83, after excluding a four-month period chargeable to defendant for motions, the People were ready within six months from commencement of the action (CPL 30.30, [4]). We also conclude that defendant was not deprived of his constitutional right to a speedy trial. Most of the delay was caused by defendant's motion practice, court congestion, the engagement of defendant's initial counsel on other trials, and, on indictment 868/83, defendant's request for, and the subsequent assignment of, substitute trial counsel. Moreover, defendant failed to demonstrate any prejudice caused by the delay, and he was incarcerated prior to trial due to his violation of parole, not by reason of the pending charges.

At the trial of indictment 780/83, the victim and two eyewitnesses testified that defendant shot the victim. Defendant testified that someone else did the shooting. Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution and according the People the benefit of every reasonable inference, the proof was legally sufficient to support the jury conviction.

On indictment 868/83, although the photograph, guns and bullets introduced into evidence had dubious evidentiary value, proof of defendant's guilt was overwhelming and there is no significant probability that, absent any error in the admission of those exhibits, the jury would have returned a different verdict. Any error was, therefore, harmless (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).


Summaries of

People v. Cartledge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 3, 1989
147 A.D.2d 917 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

People v. Cartledge

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MARK CARTLEDGE…

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

Date published: Feb 3, 1989

Citations

147 A.D.2d 917 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
538 N.Y.S.2d 679

Citing Cases

People v. Rasheen

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant…

People v. LaClere

The photographs can hardly be considered inflammatory, but even if their receipt in evidence could be viewed…