People v. Martinez

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Martinez

426 N.E.2d 488, 54 N.Y.2d 723, 442 N.Y.S.2d 994, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2651

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 7, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 426 N.E.2d 488 (People v. Martinez) 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. Martinez, 426 N.E.2d 488, 54 N.Y.2d 723, 442 N.Y.S.2d 994, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2651 (N.Y. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

On summary consideration, order affirmed. It cannot be ■ said the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to grant a continuance in the in camera hearing held to determine whether disclosure of the confidential informant was required. Where the defendant fails to establish the need for production, the trial court’s decision to end the in camera hearing on that issue does not deprive the defendant of his constitutional right to confrontation (see People v *725 Goggins, 34 NY2d 163, cert den 419 US 1012). We have examined defendant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit.

Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

On summary consideration, order affirmed. It cannot be ■ said the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to grant a continuance in the in camera hearing held to determine whether disclosure of the confidential informant was required. Where the defendant fails to establish the need for production, the trial court’s decision to end the in camera hearing on that issue does not deprive the defendant of his constitutional right to confrontation (see People v *725 Goggins, 34 NY2d 163, cert den 419 US 1012). We have examined defendant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit.

Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

426 N.E.2d 488, 54 N.Y.2d 723, 442 N.Y.S.2d 994, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2651, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-martinez-ny-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack