People v. Caballero

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Caballero

199 A.D.2d 221, 605 N.Y.S.2d 301, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12833

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

DecidedDecember 30, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 199 A.D.2d 221 (People v. Caballero) 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. Caballero, 199 A.D.2d 221, 605 N.Y.S.2d 301, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12833 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul Bookson, J.), rendered December 23, 1991, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and sentencing him to a term of 4 Vi to 13 Vi years, unanimously affirmed.

The trial court properly determined that the failure of the prosecution to furnish the defense with a list of mug shots resembling defendant was attributable to either loss or destruction. The court considered the degree of prosecutorial fault and resulting prejudice to the defendant, and imposed an appropriate sanction in the form of an adverse inference charge (People v Banch, 80 NY2d 610, 616; People v Morton, 189 AD2d 488, 492-493).

Defendant failed to raise any challenge to the procedures [222]*222utilized in determining and imposing sentence in the trial court and thus his claim is not preserved (CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 281 [1992]). If we were to reach defendant’s claim, we would find that there is no evidence that the trial court improperly punished defendant for crimes of which he was acquitted. In any event, we find no abuse of discretion in the sentence imposed. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul Bookson, J.), rendered December 23, 1991, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and sentencing him to a term of 4 Vi to 13 Vi years, unanimously affirmed.

The trial court properly determined that the failure of the prosecution to furnish the defense with a list of mug shots resembling defendant was attributable to either loss or destruction. The court considered the degree of prosecutorial fault and resulting prejudice to the defendant, and imposed an appropriate sanction in the form of an adverse inference charge (People v Banch, 80 NY2d 610, 616; People v Morton, 189 AD2d 488, 492-493).

Defendant failed to raise any challenge to the procedures [222]*222utilized in determining and imposing sentence in the trial court and thus his claim is not preserved (CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 281 [1992]). If we were to reach defendant’s claim, we would find that there is no evidence that the trial court improperly punished defendant for crimes of which he was acquitted. In any event, we find no abuse of discretion in the sentence imposed. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 A.D.2d 221, 605 N.Y.S.2d 301, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12833, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-caballero-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack