People v. Gladman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gladman

49 A.D.2d 912, 373 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11166

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

DecidedOctober 14, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 49 A.D.2d 912 (People v. Gladman) 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. Gladman, 49 A.D.2d 912, 373 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11166 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered June 18,1974, convicting him of robbery in the third degree and grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and of grand larceny in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. Defendant’s motion to suppress the identification testimony of two witnesses was properly denied (see Simmons v United States, 390 US 377). Defendant’s failure to request that the count of grand larceny in the third degree be charged in the alternative precludes his raising, on appeal, the contention that his conviction of that count should be reversed and dismissed (CPL 300.40, subd 3, par [b]; CPL 300.50; People v Williams, 47 AD2d 262, 264). Rabin, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan, Margett and Munder, 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, rendered June 18,1974, convicting him of robbery in the third degree and grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and of grand larceny in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. Defendant’s motion to suppress the identification testimony of two witnesses was properly denied (see Simmons v United States, 390 US 377). Defendant’s failure to request that the count of grand larceny in the third degree be charged in the alternative precludes his raising, on appeal, the contention that his conviction of that count should be reversed and dismissed (CPL 300.40, subd 3, par [b]; CPL 300.50; People v Williams, 47 AD2d 262, 264). Rabin, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan, Margett and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.2d 912, 373 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11166, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gladman-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack