People v. Callendar

683 N.E.2d 332, 90 N.Y.2d 831, 660 N.Y.S.2d 710, 1997 N.Y. LEXIS 1359
New York Court of Appeals·Decided June 10, 1997·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

The People’s sole argument is that a prejudice standard, rather than the per se error rule, should apply to Rosario violations raised by CPL 440.10 motions made before defendant’s direct appeal is concluded (see also, People v Machado, 90 NY2d 187 [decided today]). Having failed to raise this specific issue before the hearing court, the People have not preserved their claim for our review.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick and Wesley concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

People v. Callendar, 683 N.E.2d 332, 90 N.Y.2d 831, 660 N.Y.S.2d 710, 1997 N.Y. LEXIS 1359 (N.Y. 1997).

683 N.E.2d 332 (People v. Callendar) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Garcia
46 A.D.3d 461 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
People v. Espinal
10 A.D.3d 326 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)