People v. Gilbert

136 A.D.2d 562, 523 N.Y.S.2d 557, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 348
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 11, 1988
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 136 A.D.2d 562 (People v. Gilbert) 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. Gilbert, 136 A.D.2d 562, 523 N.Y.S.2d 557, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 348 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Cohen, J.), rendered June 17, 1985, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Neither dismissal of the indictment nor suppression of the identification testimony is required because the police identified the defendant through the use of fingerprints that should have been sealed pursuant to CPL 160.50. As this court has recently stated, CPL 160.50 "was part of a legislative package [563]*563whose purpose was to remove the stigma of alleged criminal activity from an accused who was acquitted by a court or against whom the charges were dismissed and to restore the former defendant to the status he occupied before the arrest and prosecution (see, L 1976, ch 877; People v Gallina, 110 AD2d 847, 848; People v Anderson, 97 Misc 2d 408, 412)” (People v Dozier, 131 AD2d 587, 588). It was not designed to immunize a defendant from the operations of a law enforcement official’s investigatory use of fingerprints (see, People v Dozier, supra; People v London, 124 AD2d 254, Iv denied 68 NY2d 1001).

The court’s charge on intoxication was not confusing and conveyed the proper burden of proof to the jury. The court was not required to instruct the jury that the People bore the burden of disproving intoxication beyond a reasonable doubt.

The interest of justice does not warrant a reduction of the sentence imposed upon the defendant. Bracken, J. P., Kunzeman, Spatt and Harwood, JJ., concur.

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

Related

In re Quadon H.
55 A.D.3d 834 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Pritzker v. City of Hudson
26 F. Supp. 2d 433 (N.D. New York, 1998)
People v. Morris
220 A.D.2d 808 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
People v. Pate
182 A.D.2d 717 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
People v. Rodriguez
152 Misc. 2d 328 (New York Supreme Court, 1991)
People v. Chi Lau
171 A.D.2d 581 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
People v. Maldonado
171 A.D.2d 695 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
136 A.D.2d 562, 523 N.Y.S.2d 557, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 348, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gilbert-nyappdiv-1988.