People v. Irwin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Irwin

195 A.D.2d 978, 602 N.Y.S.2d 569, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7761

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

DecidedJuly 16, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 195 A.D.2d 978 (People v. Irwin) 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. Irwin, 195 A.D.2d 978, 602 N.Y.S.2d 569, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7761 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The trial court properly denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment for lack of specificity of the dates of the offenses charged (see, People v Morris, 61 NY2d 290, 296). Further, the trial court did not err in conducting side bar conferences out of the hearing of defendant inasmuch as the conferences involved only questions of law or procedure (see, People v Velasco, 77 NY2d 469, 472; People v Ferguson, 67 NY2d 383; People ex rel. Lupo v Fay, 13 NY2d 253, mot to amend remittitur granted 13 NY2d 1178, cert denied 376 US 958). We have considered the issues raised by defendant in his pro se brief and conclude that they lack merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Niagara County Court, DiFlorio, J.—Sodomy, 1st Degree.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Balio, Doerr, Boomer and Boehm, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The trial court properly denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment for lack of specificity of the dates of the offenses charged (see, People v Morris, 61 NY2d 290, 296). Further, the trial court did not err in conducting side bar conferences out of the hearing of defendant inasmuch as the conferences involved only questions of law or procedure (see, People v Velasco, 77 NY2d 469, 472; People v Ferguson, 67 NY2d 383; People ex rel. Lupo v Fay, 13 NY2d 253, mot to amend remittitur granted 13 NY2d 1178, cert denied 376 US 958). We have considered the issues raised by defendant in his pro se brief and conclude that they lack merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Niagara County Court, DiFlorio, J.—Sodomy, 1st Degree.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Balio, Doerr, Boomer and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

195 A.D.2d 978, 602 N.Y.S.2d 569, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7761, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-irwin-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack