People v. Johnson

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Johnson

366 N.E.2d 80, 42 N.Y.2d 841, 397 N.Y.S.2d 380, 1977 N.Y. LEXIS 2147

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 2, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 366 N.E.2d 80 (People v. Johnson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Johnson, 366 N.E.2d 80, 42 N.Y.2d 841, 397 N.Y.S.2d 380, 1977 N.Y. LEXIS 2147 (N.Y. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum. We need not reach the issue of the propriety of the conduct of the police in destroying tape recordings of various conversations with the defendant, based upon their independent judgment that the tapes were inaudible and contained no exculpatory material, since this issue was not preserved for our review (cf. People v Tutt, 38 NY2d 1011, 1013).

The only objections raised by defendant related to certain procedures which the court, at a pretrial hearing, announced it planned to use at the trial in determining the relationship between the tapes and certain police reports. At the trial, however, defendant made no inquiry at all with respect to the tapes, nor did he request their production. Further he failed to request any charge regarding the tapes or make any posttrial motions concerning them. In sum, the defendant raised no issue in connection with the tapes calling for a ruling or instruction by the trial court. Thus, there are no reviewable rulings at issue before us on this appeal (CPL 470.35, subd 1).

Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

*843 Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

Memorandum. We need not reach the issue of the propriety of the conduct of the police in destroying tape recordings of various conversations with the defendant, based upon their independent judgment that the tapes were inaudible and contained no exculpatory material, since this issue was not preserved for our review (cf. People v Tutt, 38 NY2d 1011, 1013).

The only objections raised by defendant related to certain procedures which the court, at a pretrial hearing, announced it planned to use at the trial in determining the relationship between the tapes and certain police reports. At the trial, however, defendant made no inquiry at all with respect to the tapes, nor did he request their production. Further he failed to request any charge regarding the tapes or make any posttrial motions concerning them. In sum, the defendant raised no issue in connection with the tapes calling for a ruling or instruction by the trial court. Thus, there are no reviewable rulings at issue before us on this appeal (CPL 470.35, subd 1).

Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

*843 Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

366 N.E.2d 80, 42 N.Y.2d 841, 397 N.Y.S.2d 380, 1977 N.Y. LEXIS 2147, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-johnson-ny-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack