People v. Collins

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Collins

754 N.E.2d 192, 96 N.Y.2d 837, 729 N.Y.S.2d 433, 2001 N.Y. LEXIS 2367

New York Court of Appeals·Decided June 5, 2001·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant appeals his conviction of conspiracy in the first degree arising from his alleged participation in a large-scale drug operation. On appeal he argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a mistrial after a “stipulation” was read to the jury stating that defendant was incarcerated from February 19, 1992 to the date of trial about two and a half years later. On this record we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion as a matter of law by denying the motion for a mistrial (see, People v Robinson, 93 NY2d 986, 987-988). Defendant’s arguments with respect to the denial of his motion for severance and the Allen charge (Allen v United States, 164 US 492) are without merit. His remaining arguments are unpreserved.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley, Rosenblatt and Graffeo concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant appeals his conviction of conspiracy in the first degree arising from his alleged participation in a large-scale drug operation. On appeal he argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a mistrial after a “stipulation” was read to the jury stating that defendant was incarcerated from February 19, 1992 to the date of trial about two and a half years later. On this record we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion as a matter of law by denying the motion for a mistrial (see, People v Robinson, 93 NY2d 986, 987-988). Defendant’s arguments with respect to the denial of his motion for severance and the Allen charge (Allen v United States, 164 US 492) are without merit. His remaining arguments are unpreserved.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley, Rosenblatt and Graffeo concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

People v. Collins, 754 N.E.2d 192, 96 N.Y.2d 837, 729 N.Y.S.2d 433, 2001 N.Y. LEXIS 2367 (N.Y. 2001).

Pincite

754 N.E.2d 192 (People v. Collins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related