People v. Vanni
9 Misc.3d 130(A), 808 N.Y.S.2d 920, 2005 NYSlipOp 51577(U), 2005.NY.0009318
Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Term: 9Th And 10Th Judicial Districts
Questo libro può essere scaricato con iBooks sul tuo Mac o dispositivo iOS e con iTunes sul tuo computer. I libri devono essere letti con iBooks sia su Mac che su dispositivi iOS.
Assuming arguendo that the failure of one of the several officers responding to the crime scene to preserve certain notes constituted a Rosario violation (People v Olivero, 289 AD2d 1082, 1083 ; People v Mack, 180 AD2d 824, 825 ), we perceive no "reasonable possibility that the non-disclosure materially contributed to the result of the trial" (CPL 240.75; People v Sorbello, 285 AD2d 88, 93 ). Although the court, over objection, declined to strike the officers testimony, we find no abuse of discretion in the courts remedial action (see People v Carracedo, 89 NY2d 1059, 1062 ; People v Martinez, 71 NY2d 937, 940 ). The court issued a strong curative instruction noting the violation and the negative inferences permitted thereon, to which the defense took no exception. Further, there is no indication of prosecutorial fault (People v Martinez, 71 NY2d at 940; see also People v Johnson, 303 AD2d 208, 209 ; People v Safford, 297 AD2d 828 ); the defense conceded at trial that the witness testimony "didnt really add that much," and the defense merely speculates that the notes contained matters of exculpatory or impeachment value (People v Harris, 16 AD3d 286, 287 ). The defense made "effective use of this issue in cross-examination and summation" (People v Wilson, 2 AD3d 185, 186 ) and received other statements prepared by the officers (People v Campbell, 176 AD2d 814, 815 ). In the absence of any indication that the officer, who testified that he considered his involvement in the investigation marginal and that the notes were of no independent value, destroyed the notes in bad faith (id.), the courts curative instruction sufficiently dissipated the prejudice to defendant to satisfy the statutory standard (e.g. People v Harris, 16 AD3d at 287).
- 0,99 €
- Categoria: Diritto
- Pubblicato: 26/09/2005
- Editore: LawApp Publishers
- Pagine: 3
- Lingua: Inglese