People v. Santiago

379 N.E.2d 1138, 44 N.Y.2d 924, 44 N.Y. 924, 408 N.Y.S.2d 7, 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 2113
New York Court of Appeals·Decided June 13, 1978·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

The asserted errors in the charge to the jury, if errors they were, have not been preserved by proper protest for our review. We find no error in the failure of the People to produce the informer-witness. The identity of the informer, who was not an eyewitness to the criminal transactions, was disclosed to defense counsel. His disappearance six months before trial had not been procured by the People, and the trial court found acceptable the efforts made by the People in response to defendant’s midtrial request that he be located.

We have examined defendant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit.

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.

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

People v. Santiago, 379 N.E.2d 1138, 44 N.Y.2d 924, 44 N.Y. 924, 408 N.Y.S.2d 7, 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 2113 (N.Y. 1978).

379 N.E.2d 1138 (People v. Santiago) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kennedy v. UPPER MILFORD TP. ZHB
834 A.2d 1104 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2003)
Kennedy v. Upper Milford Township Zoning Hearing Board
834 A.2d 1104 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2003)
Gordon v. Village of Monticello, Inc.
661 N.E.2d 691 (New York Court of Appeals, 1995)
People v. Minor
119 A.D.2d 836 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)
People v. McKinney
82 A.D.2d 895 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1981)
People v. Maldonado
65 A.D.2d 519 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1978)