From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Shaw

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 21, 1995
212 A.D.2d 745 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

February 21, 1995

Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Wexner, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The testimony at the hearing established that the Assistant District Attorney had compiled a list of questions in preparation of his witness's testimony. The questions do not constitute Rosario material (see, People v. Gallardo, 196 A.D.2d 551; People v. Roberts, 178 A.D.2d 622). Further, three extremely brief factual statements contained within the list of questions were the prosecutor's work product and not statements made by Zachary Green during his pretrial interview. Accordingly, there was no Rosario violation (see, People v. Rosario, 9 N.Y.2d 286, cert denied 368 U.S. 866).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Rosenblatt, J.P., Miller, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Shaw

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 21, 1995
212 A.D.2d 745 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Shaw

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ALBERT SHAW, Appellant

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

Date published: Feb 21, 1995

Citations

212 A.D.2d 745 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
622 N.Y.S.2d 599

Citing Cases

People v. Torres

The defendant's Rosario claim is unpreserved for appellate review, and, in any event, is without merit. The…

People v. Gourgue

We agree. It is well settled that "[t]he character of a statement is not to be determined by the manner in…