People v. Griffin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Griffin

303 A.D.2d 182, 755 N.Y.S.2d 241, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2224

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

DecidedMarch 6, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 303 A.D.2d 182 (People v. Griffin) 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. Griffin, 303 A.D.2d 182, 755 N.Y.S.2d 241, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2224 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edwin Torres, J.), rendered April 10, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 10 to 20 years and 1 year, respectively, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to the extent of reducing the sentence on the conviction for criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree to a term of 6 to 12 years, and otherwise affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying [183]*183defendant’s motion for a mistrial, following a police officer’s testimony about defendant’s beeper having been confiscated during a prior arrest. The court prevented any prejudice by striking the offending testimony, and subsequently instructing the jury not to consider answers that had been stricken from the record (see People v Santiago, 52 NY2d 865 [1981]). Furthermore, defendant declined the court’s offer to deliver an additional curative instruction, insisting only upon the drastic remedy of a mistrial (see People v Young, 48 NY2d 995 [1980]).

We find the sentence excessive to the extent indicated. Concur — Tom, J.P., Buckley, Rosenberger, Williams and Friedman, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edwin Torres, J.), rendered April 10, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 10 to 20 years and 1 year, respectively, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to the extent of reducing the sentence on the conviction for criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree to a term of 6 to 12 years, and otherwise affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying [183]*183defendant’s motion for a mistrial, following a police officer’s testimony about defendant’s beeper having been confiscated during a prior arrest. The court prevented any prejudice by striking the offending testimony, and subsequently instructing the jury not to consider answers that had been stricken from the record (see People v Santiago, 52 NY2d 865 [1981]). Furthermore, defendant declined the court’s offer to deliver an additional curative instruction, insisting only upon the drastic remedy of a mistrial (see People v Young, 48 NY2d 995 [1980]).

We find the sentence excessive to the extent indicated. Concur — Tom, J.P., Buckley, Rosenberger, Williams and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

303 A.D.2d 182, 755 N.Y.S.2d 241, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2224, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-griffin-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack