People v. Carreras

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Carreras

83 A.D.2d 590, 441 N.Y.S.2d 118, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14878

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

DecidedJuly 13, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 83 A.D.2d 590 (People v. Carreras) 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. Carreras, 83 A.D.2d 590, 441 N.Y.S.2d 118, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14878 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Naro, J.), rendered April 20, 1978, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (two counts) and grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and new trial ordered. The trial court’s charge as to the alibi defense was improper as it served to place the burden upon the defendant to prove the truth of his alibi (see People v Lee, 80 AD2d 905; People v Jones, 74 AD2d 515; People v Griswold, 72 AD2d 778). “A defendant does not have to prove the truth of his alibi in any way” (People v Griswold, supra, p 778). Furthermore, the court’s statement that the alibi evidence should be “carefully scrutinized” was misleading, since no similar admonition was contained in the court’s charge on the issue of identification (see People v Fludd, 68 AD2d 409). We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Gulotta, J. P., Cohalan, O’Connor and Thompson, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Naro, J.), rendered April 20, 1978, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (two counts) and grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and new trial ordered. The trial court’s charge as to the alibi defense was improper as it served to place the burden upon the defendant to prove the truth of his alibi (see People v Lee, 80 AD2d 905; People v Jones, 74 AD2d 515; People v Griswold, 72 AD2d 778). “A defendant does not have to prove the truth of his alibi in any way” (People v Griswold, supra, p 778). Furthermore, the court’s statement that the alibi evidence should be “carefully scrutinized” was misleading, since no similar admonition was contained in the court’s charge on the issue of identification (see People v Fludd, 68 AD2d 409). We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Gulotta, J. P., Cohalan, O’Connor and Thompson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 A.D.2d 590, 441 N.Y.S.2d 118, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14878, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-carreras-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack