People v. Word

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Word

118 A.D.2d 823, 500 N.Y.S.2d 79, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54670

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

DecidedMarch 24, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 118 A.D.2d 823 (People v. Word) 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. Word, 118 A.D.2d 823, 500 N.Y.S.2d 79, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54670 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.), rendered December 15, 1983, convicting him of hindering prosecution in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

The defendant’s conviction of hindering prosecution in the second degree (see, Penal Law § 205.60) was supported by legally sufficient evidence.

Defense counsel and an Assistant District Attorney entered into a stipulation pursuant to which the People were permitted to establish their case through the use of transcripts of testimony given by various witnesses on prior occasions. Reversal is not warranted because the court did not inquire of the defendant personally whether he had knowingly agreed to the stipulation (see, People v Mills, 103 AD2d 379). Lazer, J. P., Thompson, Bracken and Rubin, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.), rendered December 15, 1983, convicting him of hindering prosecution in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

The defendant’s conviction of hindering prosecution in the second degree (see, Penal Law § 205.60) was supported by legally sufficient evidence.

Defense counsel and an Assistant District Attorney entered into a stipulation pursuant to which the People were permitted to establish their case through the use of transcripts of testimony given by various witnesses on prior occasions. Reversal is not warranted because the court did not inquire of the defendant personally whether he had knowingly agreed to the stipulation (see, People v Mills, 103 AD2d 379). Lazer, J. P., Thompson, Bracken and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

118 A.D.2d 823, 500 N.Y.S.2d 79, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54670, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-word-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack