People v. Styles

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Styles

237 A.D.2d 206, 655 N.Y.S.2d 931, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2784

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

DecidedMarch 25, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 237 A.D.2d 206 (People v. Styles) 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. Styles, 237 A.D.2d 206, 655 N.Y.S.2d 931, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2784 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Joseph Cerbone, J.), rendered April 20, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 71/2 to 15 years, unanimously affirmed.

Review of defendant’s claim that he was denied his right to be present at robing room discussions with prospective jurors is precluded, since defendant has failed to provide this Court with a record adequately showing any such absence (see, People v Maher, 89 NY2d 318). Moreover, the totality of the record, including the course of conduct followed by the court and counsel, established that defendant was present during such robing room conferences.

The People’s cross-examination and summation attacks upon defendant’s furnishing of false pedigree information to the police did not constitute impermissible attacks on defendant’s postarrest silence (see, People v Blake, 184 AD2d 334). Concur— Ellerin, J. P., Nardelli, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Joseph Cerbone, J.), rendered April 20, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 71/2 to 15 years, unanimously affirmed.

Review of defendant’s claim that he was denied his right to be present at robing room discussions with prospective jurors is precluded, since defendant has failed to provide this Court with a record adequately showing any such absence (see, People v Maher, 89 NY2d 318). Moreover, the totality of the record, including the course of conduct followed by the court and counsel, established that defendant was present during such robing room conferences.

The People’s cross-examination and summation attacks upon defendant’s furnishing of false pedigree information to the police did not constitute impermissible attacks on defendant’s postarrest silence (see, People v Blake, 184 AD2d 334). Concur— Ellerin, J. P., Nardelli, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

237 A.D.2d 206, 655 N.Y.S.2d 931, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2784, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-styles-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack