People v. Wright

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Wright

31 A.D.2d 740, 296 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4703

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

DecidedJanuary 28, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 31 A.D.2d 740 (People v. Wright) 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. Wright, 31 A.D.2d 740, 296 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4703 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, entered June 21,1967, denying, without a hearing, defendant’s motion for a writ of error coram nobis, unanimously reversed, on the law' and the facts, and matter remanded for a hearing. The defendant was convicted upon a trial before the court and jury of robbery in the first degree and related crimes, but now alleges that the prosecution improperly failed to produce for his use on the trial certain police records which would have aided him in his defense of the charges. These records allegedly tend to impeach the testimony of the complainant and a police officer at the trial with regard to the complainant’s identification of his assailant at the time of the crime. The District Attorney does not deny the defendant’s allegations, nor refute them with conclusive documentary evidence, and, under all the circumstances, we have concluded that a hearing should be had on the validity of the defendant’s allegations. (People v. Lake, 14 N Y 2d 790; People v. Zilliner, 19 A D 2d 806, affd. 14 N Y 2d 834.) Concur — Stevens, P. J., Eager, Tilzer, McGivern and Rabin, JJ.

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

Order, entered June 21,1967, denying, without a hearing, defendant’s motion for a writ of error coram nobis, unanimously reversed, on the law' and the facts, and matter remanded for a hearing. The defendant was convicted upon a trial before the court and jury of robbery in the first degree and related crimes, but now alleges that the prosecution improperly failed to produce for his use on the trial certain police records which would have aided him in his defense of the charges. These records allegedly tend to impeach the testimony of the complainant and a police officer at the trial with regard to the complainant’s identification of his assailant at the time of the crime. The District Attorney does not deny the defendant’s allegations, nor refute them with conclusive documentary evidence, and, under all the circumstances, we have concluded that a hearing should be had on the validity of the defendant’s allegations. (People v. Lake, 14 N Y 2d 790; People v. Zilliner, 19 A D 2d 806, affd. 14 N Y 2d 834.) Concur — Stevens, P. J., Eager, Tilzer, McGivern and Rabin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A.D.2d 740, 296 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4703, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-wright-nyappdiv-1969.