People v. Haggray, 107965

• Decision Date: 07 June 2018
• Docket Number: 107965
• Citation: 162 A.D.3d 1106,78 N.Y.S.3d 494
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Nyjew HAGGRAY, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

162 A.D.3d 1106
78 N.Y.S.3d 494

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Nyjew HAGGRAY, Appellant.

107965

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Calendar Date: April 27, 2018
Decided and Entered: June 7, 2018

Theodore J. Stein, Woodstock, for appellant.

P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Michael C. Wetmore of counsel), for respondent.

Before: McCarthy, J.P., Egan Jr., Devine, Mulvey and Rumsey, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Egan Jr., J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Herrick, J.), rendered October 15, 2015, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of robbery in the second degree and grand larceny in the third degree.

Defendant was charged in a four-count indictment with robbery in the first degree (two counts), robbery in the second degree and grand larceny in the third degree in connection with an armed robbery in the City of Albany. Following several hearings and a jury trial, County Court declared a mistrial in March 2015 after the jury was unable to reach a verdict. A second jury trial was subsequently conducted, whereupon defendant was convicted of robbery in the second degree and grand larceny in the third degree. Defendant was then sentenced, as a second violent felony offender, to an aggregate prison term of 10 years, to be followed by five years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.

Defendant contends, among other things, that the People deprived him of an opportunity to develop an effective argument on appeal by failing to provide him with certain video and photographic exhibits that were introduced into evidence at trial in a format that he could readily

78 N.Y.S.3d 495

view.¹ Specifically, defendant avers that, although the People provided him with copies of 14 DVDs introduced as exhibits at trial, he was unable to view the contents of exhibit Nos. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 18 and 108.

Defendant has a "fundamental right to appellate review of a criminal conviction" ( People v....