People v. Tucker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Tucker

174 A.D.2d 1028, 572 N.Y.S.2d 191, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8969

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

DecidedJune 7, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 174 A.D.2d 1028 (People v. Tucker) 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. Tucker, 174 A.D.2d 1028, 572 N.Y.S.2d 191, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8969 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that the court’s charge on his alibi defense was erroneous because it suggested that the defendant had a burden of proof, which he does not (see, People v Victor, 62 NY2d 374). We are obliged to address that issue notwithstanding defendant’s failure to preserve it for review by timely objection (see, People v Jackson, 167 AD2d 893). We find the error harmless, however, because the evidence of defendant’s guilt was overwhelming. The victim of the attempted murder, who was a close acquaintance of the defendant, testified that defendant fired several shots at her and her boyfriend, the murder victim, in retaliation for her boyfriend’s alleged theft of cocaine from the codefendant. Another witness testified that he observed defendant carrying the murder weapon shortly after the shooting occurred. Thus, we conclude that there is no reasonable possibility that the court’s erroneous alibi instruction contributed to defendant’s convictions (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 237; People v Cadorette, 83 AD2d 908, affd 56 NY2d 1007; People v Shaw, 112 AD2d 958, 959).

We have reviewed the other issues raised on appeal by counsel and by defendant pro se and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Egan, J.—Murder, 2nd Degree.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Denman, Green, Pine and Lowery, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that the court’s charge on his alibi defense was erroneous because it suggested that the defendant had a burden of proof, which he does not (see, People v Victor, 62 NY2d 374). We are obliged to address that issue notwithstanding defendant’s failure to preserve it for review by timely objection (see, People v Jackson, 167 AD2d 893). We find the error harmless, however, because the evidence of defendant’s guilt was overwhelming. The victim of the attempted murder, who was a close acquaintance of the defendant, testified that defendant fired several shots at her and her boyfriend, the murder victim, in retaliation for her boyfriend’s alleged theft of cocaine from the codefendant. Another witness testified that he observed defendant carrying the murder weapon shortly after the shooting occurred. Thus, we conclude that there is no reasonable possibility that the court’s erroneous alibi instruction contributed to defendant’s convictions (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 237; People v Cadorette, 83 AD2d 908, affd 56 NY2d 1007; People v Shaw, 112 AD2d 958, 959).

We have reviewed the other issues raised on appeal by counsel and by defendant pro se and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Egan, J.—Murder, 2nd Degree.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Denman, Green, Pine and Lowery, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 A.D.2d 1028, 572 N.Y.S.2d 191, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8969, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tucker-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack