People v. Blake

278 A.D.2d 887, 718 N.Y.S.2d 917, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13661
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 27, 2000
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 278 A.D.2d 887 (People v. Blake) 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. Blake, 278 A.D.2d 887, 718 N.Y.S.2d 917, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13661 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s request for a missing witness charge. Testimony from those additional witnesses would have been cumulative (see, People v Gonzalez, 68 NY2d 424, 428; People v Early, 266 AD2d 881, 881-882, lv denied 94 NY2d 918). We reject defendant’s further contention that the court erred in excluding hearsay testimony. The testimony concerned a “recalled or recast description of events that were observed in the recent past,” and thus did not fall within the present sense impression exception to the hearsay rule (People v Vasquez, 88 NY2d 561, 575). The sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Wolfgang, J. — Assault, 2nd Degree.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Hurlbutt, Kehoe and Lawton, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Calderon
284 A.D.2d 942 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
278 A.D.2d 887, 718 N.Y.S.2d 917, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-blake-nyappdiv-2000.