People v. Harper

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Harper

11 A.D.3d 711, 783 N.Y.S.2d 291, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12501

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 25, 2004·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rios, J.), rendered September 11, 2000, convicting him of robbery in the second degree and grand larceny in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the trial court’s Sandoval ruling (see People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371 [1974]) constituted a provident exercise of discretion (see People v Hegdal, 266 AD2d 472 [1999]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, are without merit. Ritter, J.P., S. Miller, Goldstein and Lifson, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rios, J.), rendered September 11, 2000, convicting him of robbery in the second degree and grand larceny in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the trial court’s Sandoval ruling (see People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371 [1974]) constituted a provident exercise of discretion (see People v Hegdal, 266 AD2d 472 [1999]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, are without merit. Ritter, J.P., S. Miller, Goldstein and Lifson, JJ., concur.

People v. Harper, 11 A.D.3d 711, 783 N.Y.S.2d 291, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12501 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

11 A.D.3d 711 (People v. Harper) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related