People v. Minson
This text of 3 A.D.3d 540 (People v. Minson) 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.
Opinion
[541]*541Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Spires, J.), rendered February 16, 2000, convicting him of murder in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The trial court properly denied the defendant’s request for a missing witness charge, since the record demonstrates that the witness in question was not knowledgeable about any material issue (see People v Welch, 307 AD2d 776, 777-778 [2003], lv denied 100 NY2d 625 [2003]).
The “Unusual Occurrence Report” and the “Homicide Analysis Report” did not constitute Brady material (see Brady v Maryland, 373 US 83 [1963]) since the information contained in the reports was not exculpatory. In any event, assuming that the reports constituted Brady material, the defendant was provided with them at a time when he had a meaningful opportunity to use them (see People v Cortijo, 70 NY2d 868, 870 [1987]; People v Barnes, 200 AD2d 751, 752 [1994]).
The defendant’s remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Altman, J.P., Goldstein, Crane and Mastro, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 A.D.3d 540, 770 N.Y.S.2d 632, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 476, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-minson-nyappdiv-2004.