People v. Morano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Morano

111 A.D.2d 273, 489 N.Y.S.2d 108, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51391

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

DecidedMay 13, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 111 A.D.2d 273 (People v. Morano) 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. Morano, 111 A.D.2d 273, 489 N.Y.S.2d 108, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51391 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Baker, J.), rendered March 16, 1984, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Although it was error to permit certain testimony concerning defendant’s involvement in other drug sales, the objections ultimately were sustained, and, in the totality of this record, including the strong evidence of defendant’s guilt, we find the error harmless. We also decline to hold that under New York’s statutory scheme every defendant is entitled to a felony hearing or that CPL 180.10 (4) is unconstitutional because it does not so provide.

We find no merit in the balance of defendant’s contentions. Titone, J. P., Lazer, Mangano and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Baker, J.), rendered March 16, 1984, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Although it was error to permit certain testimony concerning defendant’s involvement in other drug sales, the objections ultimately were sustained, and, in the totality of this record, including the strong evidence of defendant’s guilt, we find the error harmless. We also decline to hold that under New York’s statutory scheme every defendant is entitled to a felony hearing or that CPL 180.10 (4) is unconstitutional because it does not so provide.

We find no merit in the balance of defendant’s contentions. Titone, J. P., Lazer, Mangano and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 A.D.2d 273, 489 N.Y.S.2d 108, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-morano-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack