People v. Caraballo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Caraballo

174 A.D.2d 381, 570 N.Y.S.2d 575, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7960

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

DecidedJune 11, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 174 A.D.2d 381 (People v. Caraballo) 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. Caraballo, 174 A.D.2d 381, 570 N.Y.S.2d 575, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7960 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rose L. Rubin, J.), entered July 5, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him as a predicate felon to an indeterminate prison term of from 3 to 6 years, unanimously reversed, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice and the matter remanded for a new trial.

Defendant and his brother, co-defendant Jose Caraballo, were jointly tried under an indictment charging both of them with robbery, and charging Jose only with criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree. Although the complainant did not state that he was robbed at knife-point, a police officer testified that upon approaching the scene of the robbery, he saw a shiny object in Jose Caraballo’s hand. Thirty dollars [382]*382and a switchblade knife were recovered from Jose Caraballo’s pocket.

On the appeal of co-defendant Jose Caraballo, this Court reversed and remanded for separate trials on the robbery and weapon possession counts on the ground that these counts were not properly joinable under CPL 200.20 (2) (b) (People v Caraballo, 162 AD2d 214). We believe that defendant was also deprived of a fair trial by the evidence of his co-defendant’s possession of a knife.

In view of the foregoing, we do not address defendant’s other contentions. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Kupferman, Ross, Asch and Kassal, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rose L. Rubin, J.), entered July 5, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him as a predicate felon to an indeterminate prison term of from 3 to 6 years, unanimously reversed, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice and the matter remanded for a new trial.

Defendant and his brother, co-defendant Jose Caraballo, were jointly tried under an indictment charging both of them with robbery, and charging Jose only with criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree. Although the complainant did not state that he was robbed at knife-point, a police officer testified that upon approaching the scene of the robbery, he saw a shiny object in Jose Caraballo’s hand. Thirty dollars [382]*382and a switchblade knife were recovered from Jose Caraballo’s pocket.

On the appeal of co-defendant Jose Caraballo, this Court reversed and remanded for separate trials on the robbery and weapon possession counts on the ground that these counts were not properly joinable under CPL 200.20 (2) (b) (People v Caraballo, 162 AD2d 214). We believe that defendant was also deprived of a fair trial by the evidence of his co-defendant’s possession of a knife.

In view of the foregoing, we do not address defendant’s other contentions. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Kupferman, Ross, Asch and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 A.D.2d 381, 570 N.Y.S.2d 575, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7960, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-caraballo-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack