People v. Gaines

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gaines

115 A.D.2d 659, 496 N.Y.S.2d 497, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55106

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

DecidedDecember 23, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 115 A.D.2d 659 (People v. Gaines) 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. Gaines, 115 A.D.2d 659, 496 N.Y.S.2d 497, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55106 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Thorp, J.), rendered January 20, 1983, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Harrington, J.), of that branch of defendant’s pretrial motion which sought suppression of identification testimony.

Judgment affirmed.

Since defendant pleaded guilty to robbery in the second degree as a lesser included offense of robbery in the first degree charged in the indictment, the issue of the sufficiency of the Grand Jury evidence was waived (see, People v Pelchat, [660]*66062 NY2d 97, 108; People v Thomas, 74 AD2d 317, affd 53 NY2d 338; see also, People v Case, 42 NY2d 98). Moreover, the prosecution did not fail to timely produce exculpatory matter. Finally, suppression of the identification testimony of the witness Weatherly was properly denied (see, Manson v Brathwaite, 432 US 98). Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Niehoff and Fiber, 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 County Court, Nassau County (Thorp, J.), rendered January 20, 1983, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Harrington, J.), of that branch of defendant’s pretrial motion which sought suppression of identification testimony.

Judgment affirmed.

Since defendant pleaded guilty to robbery in the second degree as a lesser included offense of robbery in the first degree charged in the indictment, the issue of the sufficiency of the Grand Jury evidence was waived (see, People v Pelchat, [660]*66062 NY2d 97, 108; People v Thomas, 74 AD2d 317, affd 53 NY2d 338; see also, People v Case, 42 NY2d 98). Moreover, the prosecution did not fail to timely produce exculpatory matter. Finally, suppression of the identification testimony of the witness Weatherly was properly denied (see, Manson v Brathwaite, 432 US 98). Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Niehoff and Fiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

115 A.D.2d 659, 496 N.Y.S.2d 497, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55106, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gaines-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack