From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hopson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 9, 1992
182 A.D.2d 441 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

April 9, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Harold Silverman, J.).


The People's evidence at trial was that defendant was observed displaying a pistol to another person, attempted to discard the weapon in a trash can upon arrival of the police, and struggled violently with the police when they arrested him. Each of the officers testified that they were injured in the struggle and that defendant was not. Defendant argues that he was deprived of a fair trial by the exclusion of medical records that would have demonstrated that he was injured, and thereby lend support to his theory that the police fabricated their story that he possessed a gun and resisted arrest in order to cover the truth that they unjustifiably beat him.

We disagree, no foundation having been laid for the admission of these records, linking their contents to the struggle with the police officers, and no offer of proof having been made of the contents of the record. Under these circumstances, the records were not admissible either to impeach the credibility of the officers, or to establish a justification defense to the charge of resisting arrest.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Ross and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Hopson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 9, 1992
182 A.D.2d 441 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. Hopson

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOHN HOPSON, Also…

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

Date published: Apr 9, 1992

Citations

182 A.D.2d 441 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
582 N.Y.S.2d 168

Citing Cases

People v. Reid

Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the testimony presented at the two hearings established that his…

People v. Attawwab

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. Contrary to the defendant's contention, he failed to lay a proper…