People v. Nicholas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Nicholas

1 A.D.2d 614, 767 N.Y.S.2d 663, 1 A.D.3d 614, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12442

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

DecidedNovember 24, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 1 A.D.2d 614 (People v. Nicholas) 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. Nicholas, 1 A.D.2d 614, 767 N.Y.S.2d 663, 1 A.D.3d 614, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12442 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Demarest, J), rendered April 17, 2001, convicting him of assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence a police detective’s testimony that the detective identified him as a suspect after the detective spoke with an individual who was not called as a witness. This claim is unpreserved for appellate review, and in any event, is without merit since the challenged statement did not implicate the defendant as the perpetrator of the crime (see People v McClane, 190 AD2d 868 [1993]; cf. People v Latta, 295 AD2d 449 [2002]; People v Martinez, 269 AD2d 608 [2000]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, [615]*61590 AD2d 80 [1982]). S. Miller, J.P., Krausman, Townes and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Demarest, J), rendered April 17, 2001, convicting him of assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence a police detective’s testimony that the detective identified him as a suspect after the detective spoke with an individual who was not called as a witness. This claim is unpreserved for appellate review, and in any event, is without merit since the challenged statement did not implicate the defendant as the perpetrator of the crime (see People v McClane, 190 AD2d 868 [1993]; cf. People v Latta, 295 AD2d 449 [2002]; People v Martinez, 269 AD2d 608 [2000]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, [615]*61590 AD2d 80 [1982]). S. Miller, J.P., Krausman, Townes and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 A.D.2d 614, 767 N.Y.S.2d 663, 1 A.D.3d 614, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12442, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-nicholas-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack