People v. Walton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Walton

94 A.D.2d 709, 462 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18147

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

DecidedMay 2, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 94 A.D.2d 709 (People v. Walton) 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. Walton, 94 A.D.2d 709, 462 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18147 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Booth, J.), rendered August 7, 1980, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. By order of this court, dated July 19, 1982 {People v Walton, 89 AD2d 611), this matter was remitted to Criminal Term for a hearing on whether a four-page summary of an interview between the complainant and an Assistant District Attorney, which was not turned over to the defense as Rosario material (see People v Rosario, 9 NY2d 286, cert den 368 US 866), was a duplicative equivalent of the complainant’s Grand Jury testimony. Criminal Term, after comparing the two, found that the summary was indeed duplicative of the complainant’s testimony before the Grand Jury. After an independent comparison of the two transcriptions of the complainant’s statements we have concluded that Criminal Term’s finding is correct. Hence, the People’s failure to turn over the summary was not error since it was cumulative to the transcript of complainant’s Grand Jury testimony {People v Consolazio, 40 NY2d 446, cert den 433 US 914). We find no merit to appellant’s remaining contention. Titone, J. P., Mangano, Weinstein and Boyers, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Booth, J.), rendered August 7, 1980, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. By order of this court, dated July 19, 1982 {People v Walton, 89 AD2d 611), this matter was remitted to Criminal Term for a hearing on whether a four-page summary of an interview between the complainant and an Assistant District Attorney, which was not turned over to the defense as Rosario material (see People v Rosario, 9 NY2d 286, cert den 368 US 866), was a duplicative equivalent of the complainant’s Grand Jury testimony. Criminal Term, after comparing the two, found that the summary was indeed duplicative of the complainant’s testimony before the Grand Jury. After an independent comparison of the two transcriptions of the complainant’s statements we have concluded that Criminal Term’s finding is correct. Hence, the People’s failure to turn over the summary was not error since it was cumulative to the transcript of complainant’s Grand Jury testimony {People v Consolazio, 40 NY2d 446, cert den 433 US 914). We find no merit to appellant’s remaining contention. Titone, J. P., Mangano, Weinstein and Boyers, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

94 A.D.2d 709, 462 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18147, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-walton-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack