From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Eric Rivera

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 21, 1996
232 A.D.2d 584 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Summary

In Rivera (unlike herein), the presenting prosecutor actually made contact with defendant Rivera's counsel a full four business days prior to the last day of the grand jury term, to inform counsel that defendant Rivera had until the last day of the term to testify.

Summary of this case from People v. Leggett

Opinion

October 21, 1996.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Eng, J.), rendered August 10, 1994, convicting him of assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Before: Altman, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ.


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the prosecutor did not deny the defendant his right to testify before the Grand Jury. Therefore, dismissal of the indictment was not warranted under CPL 190.50 (5) (a), 210.20, and 210.35. At bar, the defendant was arraigned in Criminal Court on November 23, 1993, at which time the People served a Grand Jury notice on the defendant. The defendant gave notice of his intention to testify before the Grand Jury, and the case was adjourned until Friday, November 26, 1993. The defendant appeared in court with his attorney on November 26, 1993, and the Supreme Court found that on that day, the defendant was ready and willing to testify before the Grand Jury. However, the Assistant District Attorney handling the case stated that "there has been no Grand Jury action yet".

While it is not clear as to what events transpired after November 26, 1993, the record indicates that by November 29, 1993, the Assistant District Attorney informed defense counsel that the defendant had until Friday, December 3, 1993 — the last day of the Grand Jury's term — to testify. The defendant was, therefore, accorded "`a reasonable time to exercise his right to appear as a witness therein'"( People v Pugh, 207 AD2d 503; People v Ferrara, 99 AD2d 257).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Eric Rivera

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 21, 1996
232 A.D.2d 584 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

In Rivera (unlike herein), the presenting prosecutor actually made contact with defendant Rivera's counsel a full four business days prior to the last day of the grand jury term, to inform counsel that defendant Rivera had until the last day of the term to testify.

Summary of this case from People v. Leggett
Case details for

People v. Eric Rivera

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ERIC RIVERA, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 21, 1996

Citations

232 A.D.2d 584 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
648 N.Y.S.2d 954

Citing Cases

People v. Leggett

Moreover (unlike herein), the Moore court found that three completed telephone contacts by defense counsel to…

People v. Leggett

Moreover (unlike herein), the Moore Court found that three completed telephone contacts by defense counsel to…