People v. Barber

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Barber

247 A.D.2d 485, 668 N.Y.S.2d 681, 667 N.Y.S.2d 948, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 995

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

DecidedFebruary 9, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 247 A.D.2d 485 (People v. Barber) 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. Barber, 247 A.D.2d 485, 668 N.Y.S.2d 681, 667 N.Y.S.2d 948, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 995 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (DeRiggi, J.), rendered September 6, 1995, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (four counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant was not entitled to sanctions for the People’s failure to preserve certain tape recordings of phone calls made to the 911 police emergency phone number. Before the defendant requested them the tapes in question were destroyed pursuant to routine police procedure. Moreover, the defense was furnished with “Sprint” reports which reflected the statements made by the witnesses to the 911 operator. Under these circumstances, there is no evidence of bad faith by the prosecution (see, People v Johnson, 239 AD2d 361; People v Pavon, 234 AD2d 82; People v Hyde, 172 AD2d 305).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit.

Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Ritter and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (DeRiggi, J.), rendered September 6, 1995, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (four counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant was not entitled to sanctions for the People’s failure to preserve certain tape recordings of phone calls made to the 911 police emergency phone number. Before the defendant requested them the tapes in question were destroyed pursuant to routine police procedure. Moreover, the defense was furnished with “Sprint” reports which reflected the statements made by the witnesses to the 911 operator. Under these circumstances, there is no evidence of bad faith by the prosecution (see, People v Johnson, 239 AD2d 361; People v Pavon, 234 AD2d 82; People v Hyde, 172 AD2d 305).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit.

Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Ritter and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

247 A.D.2d 485, 668 N.Y.S.2d 681, 667 N.Y.S.2d 948, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 995, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-barber-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack