People v. Dudley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Dudley

268 A.D.2d 442, 703 N.Y.S.2d 489, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 159

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

DecidedJanuary 10, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 268 A.D.2d 442 (People v. Dudley) 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. Dudley, 268 A.D.2d 442, 703 N.Y.S.2d 489, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 159 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Eng, J.), rendered April 30, 1997, upon a jury verdict, convicting him of burglary in the third degree (two counts), and robbery in the third degree, and imposing sentence.

[443]*443Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.

The trial court erred in failing to sanction the People for their failure to provide the defendant with his arrest photograph (see, CPL 240.20 [1] [d]). The failure to provide the photograph prejudiced the defendant and warrants reversal (People v DaGata, 86 NY2d 40; see also, People v Cobb, 104 AD2d 656).

In light of our determination we need not reach the defendant’s remaining contention. Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Eng, J.), rendered April 30, 1997, upon a jury verdict, convicting him of burglary in the third degree (two counts), and robbery in the third degree, and imposing sentence.

[443]*443Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.

The trial court erred in failing to sanction the People for their failure to provide the defendant with his arrest photograph (see, CPL 240.20 [1] [d]). The failure to provide the photograph prejudiced the defendant and warrants reversal (People v DaGata, 86 NY2d 40; see also, People v Cobb, 104 AD2d 656).

In light of our determination we need not reach the defendant’s remaining contention. Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 A.D.2d 442, 703 N.Y.S.2d 489, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 159, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dudley-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack