People v. Hill

30 A.D.2d 976, 294 N.Y.S.2d 597, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3155
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 21, 1968·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Order of the County Court, Nassau County, entered February 29, 1968, affirmed. The only allegation in the petition which would entitle appellant to coram nobis relief, if proved, was that the complaining witness had said off the record that he could not identify appellant as one of the men who robbed him and that the District Attorney, knowing of these statements, intentionally or unintentionally suppressed this evidence favorable to appellant. We can and do take judicial notice of the record on appeal in this court in People v. Ferguson (26 A D 2d 772) and People v. Duff (26 A D 2d 772) (Richardson, Evidence [9th ed.], § 30, and cases cited there). Appellant was tried together with Ferguson and Duff. The trial minutes establish that the complaining witness testified that he could not identify appellant as one of the men who had held him up. That record conclusively refutes appellant’s claim. There is no obligation to assign counsel to assist in the prosecution of specious issues (People ex rel. Williams v. La Vallee, 19 N Y 2d 238, 241). Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Hill, 30 A.D.2d 976, 294 N.Y.S.2d 597, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3155 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

30 A.D.2d 976 (People v. Hill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

FLANDERS, PERNELL A., PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013
People v. Flanders
111 A.D.3d 1263 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
People v. Crawford
55 A.D.3d 1335 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
People v. Richardson
159 Misc. 2d 167 (New York Supreme Court, 1993)