People v. Clark

• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Writing for the Court: Before MILONAS
• Citation: People v. Clark, 639 N.Y.S.2d 801, 225 A.D.2d 472 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
• Decision Date: 26 March 1996
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Johnny CLARK, Defendant-Appellant.

Page 801

639 N.Y.S.2d 801

225 A.D.2d 472

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Johnny CLARK, Defendant-Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division First Department.

March 26, 1996.

Patsy Bonanno, for respondent.

David M. Greenberg, for defendant-appellant.

Before MILONAS, J.P., and WALLACH, ROSS and MAZZARELLI, JJ.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Phylis Skloot Bamberger, J.), rendered June 6, 1994, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of burglary in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

The trial court appropriately exercised its discretion in denying defendant's application for a visit to the crime scene on the ground that various photographs of the scene and a dimensional exhibit prepared by the defense, combined with eyewitness testimony of the arresting officer, the defendant's investigator, photographs, and other relevant testimony, permitted it, as finder of fact, to determine the contested issue of whether defendant could have entered and exited the premises through a broken window, as alleged (see, People v. Robinson, 133 A.D.2d 473, 519 N.Y.S.2d 571, lv. denied 71 N.Y.2d 1032, 530 N.Y.S.2d 567, 526 N.E.2d 60).

The parties were given the opportunity to deliver summations in the order provided for a trial by jury, and the trial court thereafter rendered its verdict (CPL 320.20[3][c], [d]. The record indicates that defense counsel was, in effect, permitted to give two summations. To the extent the...