People v. Capers

198 A.D.2d 60, 603 N.Y.S.2d 14, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10473
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Capers. Read the opinion of the Court — 170 A.D.2d 522

Opinion

—Judgment, Su[61]*61preme Court, New York County (Frederic S. Berman, J.), rendered August 23, 1990, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4 Vi to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s request for a mistrial was properly denied as untimely. A defendant must present a Rosario claim by making a timely request (People v Jackson, 78 NY2d 900). Here defendant made his request for drastic relief at the close of the evidence, despite the fact that the destruction of the officer’s handwritten version of the complainant’s report was revealed during examination of the officer. At that time, defendant merely noted his exception* which did not include a claim for specific relief (People v Rogelio, 79 NY2d 843). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Ross and Nardelli, JJ.

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

People v. Capers, 198 A.D.2d 60, 603 N.Y.S.2d 14, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10473 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

198 A.D.2d 60 (People v. Capers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Jackson
78 N.Y.2d 900 (New York Court of Appeals, 1991)
People v. Rogelio
588 N.E.2d 83 (New York Court of Appeals, 1992)