People v. Tor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Tor

270 A.D.2d 114, 704 N.Y.S.2d 474, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2841

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

DecidedMarch 16, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 270 A.D.2d 114 (People v. Tor) 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. Tor, 270 A.D.2d 114, 704 N.Y.S.2d 474, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2841 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ira Globerman, J., at jury trial and sentence; Michael Gross, J., at reconstruction hearing), rendered July 1, 1993, convicting defendant of murder in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 25 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

The record of the reconstruction hearing previously directed by this Court (254 AD2d 214) supports the hearing court’s conclusion that defendant was present at robing room conferences during voir dire. Therefore, there was no violation of defendant’s right to be present under People v Antommarchi (80 NY2d 247). Defendant’s remaining contentions concerning voir dire procedures are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find them to be without merit. Concur — Tom, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ira Globerman, J., at jury trial and sentence; Michael Gross, J., at reconstruction hearing), rendered July 1, 1993, convicting defendant of murder in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 25 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

The record of the reconstruction hearing previously directed by this Court (254 AD2d 214) supports the hearing court’s conclusion that defendant was present at robing room conferences during voir dire. Therefore, there was no violation of defendant’s right to be present under People v Antommarchi (80 NY2d 247). Defendant’s remaining contentions concerning voir dire procedures are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find them to be without merit. Concur — Tom, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.D.2d 114, 704 N.Y.S.2d 474, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2841, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tor-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack