People v. Marino

105 A.D.2d 1080, 482 N.Y.S.2d 399, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21165
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Marino. Read the opinion of the Court — 130 A.D.2d 513

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s motion for a mistrial. The trial court properly sustained defendant’s objection to the receipt of testimony as to an allegedly incriminating statement not contained in the People’s CPL 710.30 notice (People v Anderson, 80 AD2d 33; People v Iveys, 67 AD2d 349) and granted defendant’s motion to strike. Curative instructions requested by defendant’s attorney were properly given. No objection was made at trial as to the adequacy or sufficiency of the court’s curative instructions. None of the alleged errors requires reversal. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Bergin, J. — criminal possession of weapon, third degree.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Schnepp, JJ.

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

People v. Marino, 105 A.D.2d 1080, 482 N.Y.S.2d 399, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21165 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

105 A.D.2d 1080 (People v. Marino) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Iveys
67 A.D.2d 349 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
People v. Anderson
80 A.D.2d 33 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1981)