People v. Hyde
| Decision Date | 16 April 1991 |
| Citation | 568 N.Y.S.2d 388,172 A.D.2d 305 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Eric HYDE, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Before CARRO, J.P., and MILONAS, ELLERIN, SMITH and RUBIN, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Albert P. Williams, J.), rendered June 29, 1989, convicting defendant after jury trial of robbery in the first degree and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of from 2 to 6 years imprisonment, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant was identified by the victim, in an after-midnight crime-area showup, as the man who had just robbed her of her purse in a subway station. A "Sprint" transcript of the responding police officer's "911" transmissions revealed that the armed perpetrator had been described as 5'7", wearing a tweed jacket and dark pants, whereas the testimony of the officer and the victim recalled her description of the assailant as being about her height (5'9") and wearing a leather jacket and tweed pants. The officer's typewritten complaint report misdescribed the assailant as having worn a "blue jacket [and a] blue and red jacket", whereas the officer testified the description she received from the victim was that he had been wearing an oversized, grey leather jacket over a blue and red basketball-type jacket. The typewritten report also omitted any check in the box that would indicate use or possession of a weapon during the commission of the crime, although the narrative portion did refer to the fact that the assailant had brandished a gun toward the victim when she had initially attempted to chase him.
Defendant was apprehended on the street, after a chase through the neighborhood, in possession of neither a gun nor the victim's property.
At the close of evidence, defendant moved for sanctions, citing the prosecution's failure to produce Rosario material in the form of the 911 tape and the police officer's original handwritten copy of the complaint report (from which an administrative staffer had typed the final report), both of which had been destroyed by the time of trial. The imposition of such sanctions is within the sound discretion of the trial court and is not mandatory unless loss or destruction has been due to lack of due diligence in preserving the evidence, resulting in prejudice to the defendant (People v. Martinez, 71 N.Y.2d 937, 528 N.Y.S.2d 813, 524 N.E.2d 134). Here there was neither lack of due diligence...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Mallet
...defendant, a 911 tape was routinely destroyed and said destruction was not due to a lack of due diligence by the People. People v. Hyde, 172 A.D.2d 305, 568 N.Y.S.2d 388. However, a sanction is required after a 911 tape is destroyed after defendant's request for such tape [People v. Parker,......
-
People v. Boyd
...to by Detective Dzikansky, there is no evidence that any handwritten notes were made on the day of the robbery. In People v. Hyde, 172 A.D.2d 305, 306, 568 N.Y.S.2d 388, appeal denied 78 N.Y.2d 1077, 577 N.Y.S.2d 240, 583 N.E.2d 952, this court held that the routine destruction of the draft......
-
People v. McFadden
...A.D.2d 696, 697, 578 N.Y.S.2d 262 [2d Dept. 1992], lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 1008, 584 N.Y.S.2d 463, 594 N.E.2d 957 [1992] ; People v. Hyde , 172 A.D.2d 305, 306, 568 N.Y.S.2d 388 [1st Dept. 1991], lv 139 N.Y.S.3d 469 denied 78 N.Y.2d 1077, 577 N.Y.S.2d 240, 583 N.E.2d 952 [1991] ; cf. People v. ......
-
People v. McKinley
...v. Rice, 75 N.Y.2d 929, 932, 555 N.Y.S.2d 677, 554 N.E.2d 1265; People v. Diggs, 185 A.D.2d 990, 587 N.Y.S.2d 406; People v. Hyde, 172 A.D.2d 305, 568 N.Y.S.2d 388). Contrary to the defendant's contention, the People properly established a chain of custody for the admission of drugs into ev......