People v. Farquharson

294 A.D.2d 514, 742 N.Y.S.2d 553, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5231

This text of 294 A.D.2d 514 (People v. Farquharson) 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. Farquharson, 294 A.D.2d 514, 742 N.Y.S.2d 553, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5231 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Erlbaum, J.), rendered June 21, 2000, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Under the circumstances presented, the Supreme Court, after observation and sufficient inquiry, properly exercised its discretion in excluding a disruptive spectator from the courtroom (see Matter of Katz v Murtagh, 28 NY2d 234; People v Wood, 259 AD2d 777; People v Shepard, 243 AD2d 290; People v Hargrove, 60 AD2d 636, cert denied 439 US 846). Thus, the defendant was not deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to a public trial. Ritter, J.P., Smith, Luciano and Crane, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Katz v. Murtagh
269 N.E.2d 816 (New York Court of Appeals, 1971)
People v. Hargrove
60 A.D.2d 636 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1977)
People v. Shepard
243 A.D.2d 290 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
People v. Wood
259 A.D.2d 777 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
294 A.D.2d 514, 742 N.Y.S.2d 553, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5231, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-farquharson-nyappdiv-2002.