People v. Kegelman

73 A.D.2d 977, 424 N.Y.S.2d 239, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9917
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 28, 1980
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 73 A.D.2d 977 (People v. Kegelman) 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. Kegelman, 73 A.D.2d 977, 424 N.Y.S.2d 239, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9917 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, rendered February 5, 1979, convicting her of sodomy in the first degree, attempted grand larceny in the first degree, unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, assault in the third degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and petit larceny, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. Due to an oversight, and with no indication of bad faith, a taped statement made by the complainant to the police was not made available to the District Attorney, or, therefore, to the defense, until two days after the conclusion of the complainant’s testimony. However, the District Attorney made the existence of the taped statement known to the defense immediately upon his learning of it, and as the trial was still in progress at that time, the court permitted the defense to resume its cross-examination of the complainant relative to the taped statement. Under these facts, we hold that the People complied with their obligations under People v Rosario (9 NY2d 286) (see People v Pinion, 56 AD2d 664). We note further that since defendant interposed a defense of duress at trial, the court acted properly in permitting the People to introduce rebuttal evidence tending to show defendant’s propensity to commit crimes similar to the crimes charged (see People v Calvano, 30 NY2d 199). Mollen, P. J., Cohalan, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Barnett
169 A.D.2d 524 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
People v. Ciola
136 A.D.2d 557 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
People v. Harris
130 A.D.2d 939 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)
People v. Vargulik
130 A.D.2d 530 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)
People v. Atkinson
122 A.D.2d 385 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)
People v. Perez
100 A.D.2d 366 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
People v. McAfee
95 A.D.2d 898 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)
People v. Keppler
92 A.D.2d 1032 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
73 A.D.2d 977, 424 N.Y.S.2d 239, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9917, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kegelman-nyappdiv-1980.