From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hartley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 26, 1996
224 A.D.2d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

February 26, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's claim on appeal, we agree with the Supreme Court that the People's notice pursuant to CPL 710.30 adequately advised the defendant of their intent to introduce his written statement into evidence during the trial. As required pursuant to the statute, the notice informed the defendant of the time and place the written statement was made and of the sum and substance of the statement (see, People v. Lopez, 84 N.Y.2d 425). Moreover, we find that the defendant was not denied a speedy trial pursuant to CPL 30.30.

The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his pro se supplemental brief, are unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or do not require reversal. Santucci, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Hartley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 26, 1996
224 A.D.2d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. Hartley

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOHN H. HARTLEY, JR.…

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

Date published: Feb 26, 1996

Citations

224 A.D.2d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
638 N.Y.S.2d 924

Citing Cases

People v. Morgado

Denied. The language in the notice served by the People in accordance with CPL §710.30 informed the defendant…

People v. Jean-Baptiste

Defendant's motion to strike the identification notices served by the People is denied. The language in the…