From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Saunders

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 2000
272 A.D.2d 347 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Argued March 23, 2000.

May 1, 2000.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leach, J.), rendered February 17, 1999, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Neil L. Fishman of counsel), for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Nicole Beder, and Jennifer Etkin of counsel), for respondent.

FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, LEO F. McGINITY, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to his contention on appeal, the defendant received the alleged Rosario material in sufficient time to make meaningful use of it, and was not substantially prejudiced by the delay (see, People v. Ranghelle, 69 N.Y.2d 56; see e.g., People v. Farner, 234 A.D.2d 561).

SANTUCCI, J.P., FRIEDMANN, McGINITY and SMITH, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Saunders

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 2000
272 A.D.2d 347 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

People v. Saunders

Case Details

Full title:The People, etc., respondent, v. Clifford Saunders, appellant. (Ind. No…

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

Date published: May 1, 2000

Citations

272 A.D.2d 347 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
707 N.Y.S.2d 287

Citing Cases

People v. Rivera

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not substantially…