From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Fuentes

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 12, 1981
53 N.Y.2d 892 (N.Y. 1981)

Opinion

Argued April 2, 1981

Decided May 12, 1981

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, JOSEPH R. MARRO, J.

Donald M. Zolin for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney (Susan Corkery and Jerrold L. Neugarten of counsel), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

We agree with the court below that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied defendant's requests to reopen the Wade hearing during the course of the trial. A trial court may reopen a pretrial hearing if it "is satisfied, upon a showing by the defendant, that additional pertinent facts have been discovered by the defendant which he could not have discovered with reasonable diligence before the determination" of his pretrial application. (CPL 710.40, subd 4.) Here, defendant failed to establish any such pertinent facts in support of his motions at trial which would justify the reopening of the Wade hearing. Thus, the trial court committed no error when it refused defendant's requests to reopen the hearing.

We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and have found them to be without merit.

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.


Summaries of

People v. Fuentes

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 12, 1981
53 N.Y.2d 892 (N.Y. 1981)
Case details for

People v. Fuentes

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JESUS FUENTES…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: May 12, 1981

Citations

53 N.Y.2d 892 (N.Y. 1981)
440 N.Y.S.2d 625
423 N.E.2d 48

Citing Cases

People v. Clark

BELLACOSA, J. The sole issue on this appeal is whether the trial court acted within its legislatively…

Woodard v. Chappius

Furthermore, as Woodard has conceded, the decision to reopen a suppression hearing is a matter of the trial…