From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Williams

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 19, 1988
519 N.E.2d 615 (N.Y. 1988)

Opinion

Argued January 12, 1988

Decided January 19, 1988

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, Eugene P. Bambrick, J.

Fred S. Hodara and Philip L. Weinstein for appellant.

John J. Santucci, District Attorney (Annette Cohen of counsel), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

At trial the prosecution questioned two of defendant's witnesses regarding why they had not informed the authorities of the information they possessed potentially exculpating the defendant. Defendant's two central arguments on appeal are that the trial court erred in (1) allowing the prosecution's questions without the proper foundation under People v Dawson ( 50 N.Y.2d 311), and (2) failing first to hold a bench conference to assess the propriety of such questioning. No objection was made to the trial court on these grounds, however, and thus the arguments now pressed were not preserved for our review.

Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER, HANCOCK, JR., and BELLACOSA concur; Judge TITONE taking no part.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.


Summaries of

People v. Williams

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 19, 1988
519 N.E.2d 615 (N.Y. 1988)
Case details for

People v. Williams

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DAVID WILLIAMS…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jan 19, 1988

Citations

519 N.E.2d 615 (N.Y. 1988)
519 N.E.2d 615
524 N.Y.S.2d 669

Citing Cases

People v. Williams

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant's contention that the prosecutor improperly questioned…

People v. Roseboro

Therefore, any error with respect thereto did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial (see, People v…