People v. Panzardi

213 A.D.2d 1067, 624 N.Y.S.2d 500, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3914
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 17, 1995·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05) and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03) stemming from the events of October 25, 1991, when he shot the victim in the face.

There is no merit to the contention of defendant that Supreme Court erred when it refused to grant his request for a missing witness charge concerning two men who were present at the scene of the shooting. Defendant failed to make the requisite prima facie showing that the missing witnesses could be expected to testify favorably to the prosecution (see, People v Macana, 84 NY2d 173, 177; People v Gonzalez, 68 NY2d 424). Additionally, the evidence adduced at trial supports the court’s conclusion that, because the men were accomplices likely to invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, a missing witness charge was inappropriate (see, People v Macana, supra, at 177-178; People v Rodriguez, 38 NY2d 95, 98). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Doyle, J.—Assault, 2nd Degree.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Fallon, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

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

People v. Panzardi, 213 A.D.2d 1067, 624 N.Y.S.2d 500, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3914 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

213 A.D.2d 1067 (People v. Panzardi) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Thomas
300 A.D.2d 1034 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
People v. Coleman
244 A.D.2d 910 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
In re Child Protective Services
230 A.D.2d 733 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)