From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. McIntosh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 15, 1992
184 A.D.2d 662 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

June 15, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Douglass, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant sought preclusion of virtually the entire prosecution case or an adverse inference charge because of an alleged Rosario violation. The document in question was the arresting officer's application for a departmental commendation, which had been rejected by the precinct captain and thrown out. The Trial Judge correctly ruled that this destruction was inadvertent and that the absence of this document did not prejudice the defendant; its denial of the defense requests was within its discretion (see, People v. Haupt, 71 N.Y.2d 929, 930-931; People v. Martinez, 71 N.Y.2d 937). We also conclude that the sentence was appropriate. Sullivan, J.P., Harwood, Balletta and Eiber, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. McIntosh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 15, 1992
184 A.D.2d 662 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. McIntosh

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MARVIN McINTOSH…

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

Date published: Jun 15, 1992

Citations

184 A.D.2d 662 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Citing Cases

People v. Perez

Defense counsel explored the destruction of the videotape both in cross-examination and in summation. Given…

People v. Owens

Indeed, the defendant was given the opportunity to cross-examine the complainant about the alleged telephone…