From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Allen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 6, 1994
200 A.D.2d 387 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

January 6, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Thomas Galligan, J.).


Contrary to defendant's contention, the Trial Justice did not abuse his discretion when he denied an adjournment to give defendant a further opportunity to produce a witness. Defendant was unable to state when the witness could appear and failed to establish that the testimony of this witness was material (People v. Foy, 32 N.Y.2d 473).

Nor did the court err in curtailing defense counsel's attempt on cross-examination to explain defendant's struggle with the police (see, People v. Dlugash, 41 N.Y.2d 725, 736; People v Etheridge, 71 A.D.2d 861). In any event, the error was harmless in view of the complainant's convincing testimony which was otherwise corroborated (People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Rosenberger and Wallach, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Allen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 6, 1994
200 A.D.2d 387 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Allen

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CLARENCE ALLEN…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jan 6, 1994

Citations

200 A.D.2d 387 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
608 N.Y.S.2d 77

Citing Cases

People v. Melvin

The Trial Judge then stated that he would give defense counsel until the next morning to produce his "mystery…

Matter of Michael

Nor did the court abuse its discretion in denying appellant's application for a continuance in order to…