From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Fanning

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 16, 1994
209 A.D.2d 978 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

November 16, 1994

Appeal from the Oneida County Court, Buckley, J.

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


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court properly acted within its discretion when it permitted the People to amend their bill of particulars and granted defendant an adjournment (see, People v. Parker, 186 A.D.2d 157, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 1029). There is sufficient evidence in the record of the Huntley hearing to support the court's finding that defendant did not invoke his right to counsel prior to giving a statement to police. The court properly precluded defendant from introducing evidence concerning his reputation for truth and veracity, because that evidence did not relate to a trait involved in the charges of rape, sodomy, sexual abuse or endangering the welfare of a child (see, People v. Sulkey, 195 A.D.2d 1026, 1028, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 759). The sentence imposed is neither harsh nor excessive.

We have reviewed defendant's remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Fanning

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 16, 1994
209 A.D.2d 978 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Fanning

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. FRANCIS FANNING…

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

Date published: Nov 16, 1994

Citations

209 A.D.2d 978 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
620 N.Y.S.2d 23

Citing Cases

People v. Spicola

Winship, 397 US 358.) Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo ( Shawn P. Hennessy and Donna A.…

People v. Spicola

victing him upon a jury verdict of six counts of sodomy in the first degree (Penal Law former § 130.50 [3]),…