People v. Premnauth

164 N.Y.S.3d 887, 204 A.D.3d 941, 2022 NY Slip Op 02564
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 20, 2022
DocketInd. No. 102/17
StatusPublished

This text of 164 N.Y.S.3d 887 (People v. Premnauth) 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. Premnauth, 164 N.Y.S.3d 887, 204 A.D.3d 941, 2022 NY Slip Op 02564 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

People v Premnauth (2022 NY Slip Op 02564)
People v Premnauth
2022 NY Slip Op 02564
Decided on April 20, 2022
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on April 20, 2022 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, J.P.
ROBERT J. MILLER
JOSEPH A. ZAYAS
DEBORAH A. DOWLING, JJ.

2018-09055
(Ind. No. 102/17)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Albert Premnauth, appellant.


Patricia Pazner, New York, NY (Anna Jouravleva of counsel), for appellant.

Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (Johnnette Traill and Sharon Y. Brodt of counsel; Michael Tadros on the brief), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Peter F. Vallone, Jr., J.), rendered July 18, 2018, convicting him of rape in the second degree, criminal sexual act in the second degree (two counts), and endangering the welfare of a child, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying his application for a missing witness charge. Under the circumstances of this case, the People demonstrated that the witness was unavailable (see People v Gonzalez, 68 NY2d 424, 428; People v Singleton, 186 AD3d 1412, 1413; People v Joseph, 161 AD3d 1105, 1105; People v Stepney, 42 Misc 3d 139[A], 2014 NY Slip Op 50170[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists]).

BRATHWAITE NELSON, J.P., MILLER, ZAYAS and DOWLING, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Maria T. Fasulo

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Singleton
2020 NY Slip Op 04974 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Gonzalez
502 N.E.2d 583 (New York Court of Appeals, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
164 N.Y.S.3d 887, 204 A.D.3d 941, 2022 NY Slip Op 02564, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-premnauth-nyappdiv-2022.