People v. Ellis
| Decision Date | 11 June 1992 |
| Citation | 184 A.D.2d 307,584 N.Y.S.2d 569 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Frank ELLIS, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Before SULLIVAN, J.P., and MILONAS, ROSS, ASCH, and KASSAL, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ivan Warner, J.) rendered October 2, 1989, convicting defendant after a jury trial of attempted murder in the second degree, attempted assault in the first degree, robbery in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 10 to 20 years on the attempted murder and robbery in the first degree convictions, and 3 1/2 to 7 years on the remaining counts, unanimously affirmed.
When the complainant left his girlfriend's building at about 3 a.m., he was confronted by defendant at gunpoint. Defendant demanded money. After a subsequent demand, the complainant turned over $11.00. Defendant, after stating, "I should shoot you", raised his gun to the head of the complainant and fired. When the defendant missed, the complainant ran, and alerted patrolling police. The complainant provided a description of approximate age and size, some physical details, and a general description of clothing. Moments later, defendant was seen exiting an abandoned lot across the street from the scene of the robbery. Given the nature of the crime, when police stopped defendant, they patted him down, felt a bulge, and recovered a handgun. Moments later, the complainant made a confirmatory identification which was proximate to the crime in both time and location. A precinct search of defendant recovered the exact amount of currency which had been stolen from the complainant.
Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People, and giving due deference to the jury's findings of credibility, we find the defendant's guilt to have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt by overwhelming evidence (People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 494-495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672). We find no basis to reject the findings of the hearing court (People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761, 395 N.Y.S.2d 635, 363 N.E.2d 1380). The stop was justified by the description of the perpetrator's height, weight, age, clothing and weapon by an identified person (see People v. Washington, 182 A.D.2d 520, 582 N.Y.S.2d 416). The pat-down was reasonable under these circumstances as a precaution taken for the officer's own safety (CPL 140.50[3].
The prosecutor elicited on direct examination of the complainant that the complainant had three arrests dating from 1988 and 1989. On cross-examination,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Cruz, 2004 NY Slip Op 50004(U) (NY 1/5/2004)
...See also Joseph M., supra at 132 ("to effectuate this purpose, CPL § 160.50 employs language that is mandatory."); People v. Ellis, 184 A.D.2d 307 (1st Dept. 1992), lv. denied, 80 N.Y.2d 929 (1992); Matter of Wayne M., 121 Misc.2d 346, 348-49 (Family Ct. New York Cty. 1983) ("A motion to pr......
-
Padilla v. LaBalley
...Petitioner objects to the Report on two grounds. First, he argues the Report improperly drew inferences regarding People v. Ellis, 184 A.D. 2d 307 (N.Y. 1st Dept. 1992), when determining that Petitioner was not deprived of his confrontation right. (Ob j. at 2-3.) Petitioner also objects to ......
-
First American Corp v. Al-Nahyan, Civil Action No. 93-1309 (JHG)(PJA).
...for employment, or even under oath in a court of law, that no arrest or prosecution took place. See, e.g., People v. Ellis, 184 A.D.2d 307, 584 N.Y.S.2d 569, 570 (N.Y.App.Div.1992). But whether the "information" identified in § 160.60 extends significantly beyond divulging the fact of the a......
-
People v. Davis
...is concerned" diluted the People's burden of proof is not preserved for review as a matter of law (CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Ellis, 184 A.D.2d 307, 308, 584 N.Y.S.2d 569, lv. denied 80 N.Y.2d 929, 589 N.Y.S.2d 856, 603 N.E.2d 961). In any event, were we to review the claim in the interest of......