People v. Gilligan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gilligan

48 A.D.2d 724, 367 N.Y.S.2d 610, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9791

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

DecidedMay 8, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 48 A.D.2d 724 (People v. Gilligan) 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. Gilligan, 48 A.D.2d 724, 367 N.Y.S.2d 610, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9791 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Cortland County, rendered July 19, 1974, upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crimes of burglary in the third degree and possession of burglar’s tools. Following the guilty verdict, the defendant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of two to four years. The evidence of guilt was overwhelming. Accordingly, assuming arguendo that the error committed by the Trial Judge in regard to his refusal to grant inspection of the police reports to the attorney for the codefendant Paige (see People v Paige, 48 AD2d 6) was applicable to the defendant Gilligan, such error, if any, was harmless (see People v Rosario, 9 NY2d 286). Judgment affirmed. Herlihy, P. J., Greenblott, Main, Larkin and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Cortland County, rendered July 19, 1974, upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crimes of burglary in the third degree and possession of burglar’s tools. Following the guilty verdict, the defendant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of two to four years. The evidence of guilt was overwhelming. Accordingly, assuming arguendo that the error committed by the Trial Judge in regard to his refusal to grant inspection of the police reports to the attorney for the codefendant Paige (see People v Paige, 48 AD2d 6) was applicable to the defendant Gilligan, such error, if any, was harmless (see People v Rosario, 9 NY2d 286). Judgment affirmed. Herlihy, P. J., Greenblott, Main, Larkin and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A.D.2d 724, 367 N.Y.S.2d 610, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9791, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gilligan-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack