People v. Wright

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Wright

86 A.D.2d 968, 448 N.Y.S.2d 293, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15668

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

DecidedFebruary 26, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 86 A.D.2d 968 (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, 86 A.D.2d 968, 448 N.Y.S.2d 293, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15668 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously reversed, on the law, and a new trial granted. Memorandum: It was reversible error for the court, in the absence of independent proof of fabrication, to instruct the jury that it could consider as some evidence of guilt a possible false alibi (People v Russell, 266 NY 147; People v Abdul-Malik, 61 AD2d 657, 661; People v Cright, 47 AD2d 906; People v Leasure, 34 AD2d 688; Richardson, Evidence [10th ed], § 167). Since a new trial is required, we note that the instruction that a person intends the natural and probable consequences of his act, although not objected to, was erroneous (Sandstrom v Montana, 442 US 510). On the new trial, the District Attorney, before cross-examining the alibi witness concerning her failure to come forward to authorities, should lay the foundation set forth in People v Dawson (50 NY2d 311). We have considered the other points raised by defendant, including his claim that the identification testimony should have been suppressed, and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Barr, J. — robbery, first degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Hancock, Jr., Callahan, Doerr and Boomer, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously reversed, on the law, and a new trial granted. Memorandum: It was reversible error for the court, in the absence of independent proof of fabrication, to instruct the jury that it could consider as some evidence of guilt a possible false alibi (People v Russell, 266 NY 147; People v Abdul-Malik, 61 AD2d 657, 661; People v Cright, 47 AD2d 906; People v Leasure, 34 AD2d 688; Richardson, Evidence [10th ed], § 167). Since a new trial is required, we note that the instruction that a person intends the natural and probable consequences of his act, although not objected to, was erroneous (Sandstrom v Montana, 442 US 510). On the new trial, the District Attorney, before cross-examining the alibi witness concerning her failure to come forward to authorities, should lay the foundation set forth in People v Dawson (50 NY2d 311). We have considered the other points raised by defendant, including his claim that the identification testimony should have been suppressed, and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Barr, J. — robbery, first degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Hancock, Jr., Callahan, Doerr and Boomer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 A.D.2d 968, 448 N.Y.S.2d 293, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15668, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-wright-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack