People v. Catter

237 A.D.2d 526, 656 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2802
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 24, 1997
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 237 A.D.2d 526 (People v. Catter) 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. Catter, 237 A.D.2d 526, 656 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2802 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Thorp, J.), rendered April 13, 1994, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and conspiracy in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence, and (2), by permission, from an order of the County Court, Nassau County (Wexner, J.), entered December 4,1995, which, without a hearing, denied his motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 to vacate the judgment of conviction.

Ordered that the judgment and order are affirmed.

[527]*527"If the undisputed evidence establishes that a witness is an accomplice, the jury must be so instructed but, if different inferences may reasonably be drawn from the proof regarding complicity * * * the question should be left to the jury for its determination” (People v Basch, 36 NY2d 154, 157; see, People v Sweet, 78 NY2d 263; People v Cody, 190 AD2d 684). Contrary to the defendant’s contention, in the instant case it was appropriate for the court to instruct the jury to determine whether a prosecution witness was an accomplice. Further, there is no merit to the defendant’s contention that there was insufficient nonaccomplice evidence to support his conviction (see, People v Daniels, 37 NY2d 624; People v Ascheim, 144 AD2d 680).

Additionally; it was not error for the court to deny the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 without a hearing (see, People v Satterfield, 66 NY2d 796; People v Robinson, 211 AD2d 733).

The defendant’s remaining contentions lack merit. Sullivan, J. P., Santucci, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Shelton
98 A.D.3d 988 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People v. Cirigliano
15 A.D.3d 672 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
237 A.D.2d 526, 656 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2802, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-catter-nyappdiv-1997.