Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/People v. Barsuk

People v. Barsuk

275 A.D.2d 1040, 718 N.Y.S.2d 247, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9484
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedSeptember 29, 2000
StatusPublished

This text of 275 A.D.2d 1040 (People v. Barsuk) 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. Barsuk, 275 A.D.2d 1040, 718 N.Y.S.2d 247, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9484 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

—Motion for change of venue denied. Memorandum: We conclude that defendant has not met his burden of demonstrating that there is “reasonable cause to believe that a fair and impartial trial cannot be had” in Genesee County (CPL 230.20 [2]). If it develops during voir dire that a fair and impartial jury cannot be drawn, an appropriate motion can then be made. The relief requested in the motion is premature (see, People v Mateo, 239 AD2d 965; see also, People v DiPiazza, 24 NY2d 342). Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Hurlbutt and Balio, JJ. (Filed Sept. 15, 2000.)

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

Related

People v. DiPiazza
248 N.E.2d 412 (New York Court of Appeals, 1969)
People v. Mateo
239 A.D.2d 965 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
275 A.D.2d 1040, 718 N.Y.S.2d 247, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9484, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-barsuk-nyappdiv-2000.