From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Jackson

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Nov 25, 2015
133 A.D.3d 883 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)

Opinion

11-25-2015

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Walter JACKSON, appellant.

Marianne Karas, Thornwood, N.Y., for appellant. Janet DiFiore, District Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (Laurie Sapakoff and Steven A. Bender of counsel), for respondent.


Marianne Karas, Thornwood, N.Y., for appellant.

Janet DiFiore, District Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (Laurie Sapakoff and Steven A. Bender of counsel), for respondent.

Appeals by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Adler, J.), rendered July 12, 2013, convicting him of unlawful possession of marijuana (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence, and (2) a resentence of the same court imposed October 31, 2013.

ORDERED that the judgment and the resentence are affirmed.

At trial, the County Court gave an adverse inference charge permitting the jury to consider the People's failure to preserve certain physical evidence in determining the weight to be given to their witnesses' testimony. The defendant contends that this adverse inference charge was inadequate to remedy the prejudice caused to him by the People's failure to preserve the evidence. "The loss or destruction of evidence prior to trial does not necessarily require imposition of a sanction" (People v. Seignious, 114 A.D.3d 883, 884, 980 N.Y.S.2d 561 ). "The court's determination of an appropriate sanction must be based primarily on the need to eliminate prejudice to the defendant" (People v. Rice, 39 A.D.3d 567, 568–569, 834 N.Y.S.2d 254 ). Contrary to the defendant's contention, the court providently exercised its discretion in giving the adverse inference charge, as the charge given was sufficient to dispel any prejudice (see People v. Gibbs, 85 N.Y.2d 899, 900–901, 627 N.Y.S.2d 315, 650 N.E.2d 1316 ; People v. Hernandez, 25 A.D.3d 566, 566–567, 808 N.Y.S.2d 411 ; People v. Hardy, 274 A.D.2d 591, 711 N.Y.S.2d 502 ).

The defendant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit.

MASTRO, J.P., DICKERSON, MILLER and MALTESE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Jackson

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Nov 25, 2015
133 A.D.3d 883 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
Case details for

People v. Jackson

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Walter JACKSON, appellant.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Nov 25, 2015

Citations

133 A.D.3d 883 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
23 N.Y.S.3d 577

Citing Cases

People v. Lowery

In general, the People have "an affirmative obligation to preserve all discoverable evidence within their…

People v. Lowery

In general, the People have "an affirmative obligation to preserve all discoverable evidence within their…