People v. Huddleston

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Huddleston

125 A.D.2d 942, 510 N.Y.S.2d 39, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 63116

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

DecidedDecember 19, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 125 A.D.2d 942 (People v. Huddleston) 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. Huddleston, 125 A.D.2d 942, 510 N.Y.S.2d 39, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 63116 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals his conviction of robbery, first and second degrees, criminal use of a firearm, first degree, and menacing, stemming from the robbery of a cab driver in Syracuse. Defendant argues that the improper admission of statements by his codefendant Parks, which we found deprived Parks of a fair trial (People v Parks, 120 AD2d 920), also deprived him of a fair trial. Defendant’s [943]*943argument is without merit. The statements by Parks, which concerned Parks’ location prior to the incident and the amount of money he was carrying, did not implicate defendant. There was no reasonable possibility that the improperly admitted evidence contributed to defendant’s conviction (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 237).

We have examined defendant’s remaining arguments on appeal and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Gorman, J.— robbery, first degree, and other offenses.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Green, Pine and Lawton, JJ.

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

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals his conviction of robbery, first and second degrees, criminal use of a firearm, first degree, and menacing, stemming from the robbery of a cab driver in Syracuse. Defendant argues that the improper admission of statements by his codefendant Parks, which we found deprived Parks of a fair trial (People v Parks, 120 AD2d 920), also deprived him of a fair trial. Defendant’s [943]*943argument is without merit. The statements by Parks, which concerned Parks’ location prior to the incident and the amount of money he was carrying, did not implicate defendant. There was no reasonable possibility that the improperly admitted evidence contributed to defendant’s conviction (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 237).

We have examined defendant’s remaining arguments on appeal and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Gorman, J.— robbery, first degree, and other offenses.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Green, Pine and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

125 A.D.2d 942, 510 N.Y.S.2d 39, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 63116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-huddleston-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack