People v. Rogers

2020 NY Slip Op 06022
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Rogers. Read the opinion of the Court — 156 A.D.3d 1350
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 22, 2020·No. Ind No. 3975/14 3975/14 Appeal No. 12151 Case No. 2017-2875·Published

Opinion

People v Rogers (2020 NY Slip Op 06022)
People v Rogers
2020 NY Slip Op 06022
Decided on October 22, 2020
Appellate Division, First 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 and Entered: October 22, 2020
Before: Friedman, J.P., Kern, Scarpulla, Shulman, JJ.

Ind No. 3975/14 3975/14 Appeal No. 12151 Case No. 2017-2875

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

v

Bryan Rogers, Defendant-Appellant.


Janet E. Sabel, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Allen Fallek of counsel), for appellant.

Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Susan Axelrod of counsel), for respondent.



Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (A. Kirke Bartley, Jr., J.), rendered January 4, 2017, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of murder in the second degree and two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 25 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury's credibility determinations, including its resolution of alleged inconsistencies in testimony.

The court providently exercised its discretion in permitting the People to introduce limited rebuttal testimony from several witnesses, even if some of the evidence "was not technically of a rebuttal nature but more properly a part of the offering party's direct case" (CPL 260.30[7]; People v Harris, 57 NY2d 335, 345 [1982], cert denied 460 US 1047 [1983]). This evidence was responsive to issues raised on defendant's case (see e.g. People v Davis, 298 AD2d 286 [1st Dept 2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 557 2002]. In any event, defendant was not unduly prejudiced by any of the rebuttal testimony.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: October 22, 2020



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

People v. Rogers, 2020 NY Slip Op 06022 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2020).

2020 NY Slip Op 06022 (People v. Rogers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Danielson
880 N.E.2d 1 (New York Court of Appeals, 2007)
People v. Harris
442 N.E.2d 1205 (New York Court of Appeals, 1982)
People v. Davis
298 A.D.2d 286 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)