People v. Loney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Loney

43 A.D.3d 726, 841 N.Y.S.2d 444

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

DecidedSeptember 20, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 43 A.D.3d 726 (People v. Loney) 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. Loney, 43 A.D.3d 726, 841 N.Y.S.2d 444 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Denis J. Boyle, J), rendered August 23, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of A112 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly permitted the limited closure of the courtroom during the undercover officer’s testimony, where the [727]*727officer had testified that he would be returning to undercover work in the area of defendant’s arrest and in the area of the courthouse, and took precautions when entering the courthouse (see People v Ramos, 90 NY2d 490, 498-500 [1997], cert denied sub nom. Ayala v New York, 522 US 1002 [1997]).

The court properly permitted the People to reopen their case to introduce a written description of defendant made by the undercover officer prior to defendant’s arrest, when defense counsel’s summation implied that the undercover officer’s testimony about the seller’s description was a recent fabrication made to conform with defendant’s appearance at the time of his arrest (see People v McDaniel, 81 NY2d 10, 18 [1993]; People v Terrell, 298 AD2d 241 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 585 [2003]; People v De Los Angeles, 270 AD2d 196, 199 [2000], lv denied, 95 NY2d 889 [2000]). In any event, were we to find that any error occurred, we would find it to be harmless. Concur—Lippman, EJ., Mazzarelli, Sullivan, Nardelli and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Denis J. Boyle, J), rendered August 23, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of A112 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly permitted the limited closure of the courtroom during the undercover officer’s testimony, where the [727]*727officer had testified that he would be returning to undercover work in the area of defendant’s arrest and in the area of the courthouse, and took precautions when entering the courthouse (see People v Ramos, 90 NY2d 490, 498-500 [1997], cert denied sub nom. Ayala v New York, 522 US 1002 [1997]).

The court properly permitted the People to reopen their case to introduce a written description of defendant made by the undercover officer prior to defendant’s arrest, when defense counsel’s summation implied that the undercover officer’s testimony about the seller’s description was a recent fabrication made to conform with defendant’s appearance at the time of his arrest (see People v McDaniel, 81 NY2d 10, 18 [1993]; People v Terrell, 298 AD2d 241 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 585 [2003]; People v De Los Angeles, 270 AD2d 196, 199 [2000], lv denied, 95 NY2d 889 [2000]). In any event, were we to find that any error occurred, we would find it to be harmless. Concur—Lippman, EJ., Mazzarelli, Sullivan, Nardelli and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 A.D.3d 726, 841 N.Y.S.2d 444, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-loney-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack