People v. Lincoln

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Lincoln

250 A.D.2d 409, 671 N.Y.S.2d 658, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5414

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

DecidedMay 12, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 250 A.D.2d 409 (People v. Lincoln) 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. Lincoln, 250 A.D.2d 409, 671 N.Y.S.2d 658, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5414 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald Zweibel, J.), rendered March 18, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in excluding defendant’s fiancée during the testimony of the undercover officer since the officer’s testimony established that his safety would be jeopardized were she permitted to remain in the courtroom (see, People v Nieves, 90 NY2d 426). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald Zweibel, J.), rendered March 18, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in excluding defendant’s fiancée during the testimony of the undercover officer since the officer’s testimony established that his safety would be jeopardized were she permitted to remain in the courtroom (see, People v Nieves, 90 NY2d 426). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 A.D.2d 409, 671 N.Y.S.2d 658, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5414, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lincoln-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack