People v. Guevara

92 A.D.3d 802, 938 N.Y.2d 458
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Guevara. Read the opinion of the Court — 96 A.D.3d 781

Opinion

The defendant contends that he was deprived of due process because he was not provided with access to audio recordings of conversations he had with his wife while incarcerated. We disagree. Since the prosecution was not obligated to provide the defendant with the audio recordings (see People v Muller, 72 AD3d 1329 [2010]), the prosecution’s failure to provide the defendant with access to the recordings, or access to a copy of the recordings that was not “encrypted and password protected,” did not deprive him of due process or the right to a fair trial.

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Skelos, J.E, Balkin, Roman and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Guevara, 92 A.D.3d 802, 938 N.Y.2d 458 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

92 A.D.3d 802 (People v. Guevara) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Muller
72 A.D.3d 1329 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Suitte
90 A.D.2d 80 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)