People v. Baerga

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Baerga

186 A.D.2d 487, 590 N.Y.S.2d 404, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12443

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 27, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.D.2d 487 (People v. Baerga) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Baerga, 186 A.D.2d 487, 590 N.Y.S.2d 404, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12443 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Fred Eggert, J., at hearing, trial and sentence), rendered November 22, 1989, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of first degree manslaughter, and sentencing him to an indeterminate prison term of six to eighteen years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant argues that his suppression motion should have been granted, claiming that the police did not have probable cause for the arrest, and that a pair of sneakers seized as evidence were not in plain sight. We find these contentions to be without merit.

Defendant also argues that there should have been some sanction when two testifying detectives indicated that they had taken notes, later transcribed, that were subsequently lost or destroyed. The claim is unpreserved by appropriate request for relief (People v Merchant, 171 AD2d 887), and we decline to review the claim in the interest of justice due to the lack of prejudice to defendant in these circumstances. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Ross and Rubin, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

— Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Fred Eggert, J., at hearing, trial and sentence), rendered November 22, 1989, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of first degree manslaughter, and sentencing him to an indeterminate prison term of six to eighteen years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant argues that his suppression motion should have been granted, claiming that the police did not have probable cause for the arrest, and that a pair of sneakers seized as evidence were not in plain sight. We find these contentions to be without merit.

Defendant also argues that there should have been some sanction when two testifying detectives indicated that they had taken notes, later transcribed, that were subsequently lost or destroyed. The claim is unpreserved by appropriate request for relief (People v Merchant, 171 AD2d 887), and we decline to review the claim in the interest of justice due to the lack of prejudice to defendant in these circumstances. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Ross and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.D.2d 487, 590 N.Y.S.2d 404, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12443, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-baerga-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack