People v. Jones
| Citation | 130 A.D.2d 943,516 N.Y.S.2d 142 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Jovan JONES, a/k/a Bruce Battle, Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 22 May 1987 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Gerald Barth by James Maxwell, Syracuse, for appellant.
Richard Hennessy by John Cirando, Syracuse, for respondent.
Before DILLON, P.J., and CALLAHAN, GREEN, PINE and LAWTON, JJ.
Defendant pled guilty to two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree. He cites as reversible error the failure of the People to have produced at the suppression hearing an interdepartmental memorandum which was prepared by Investigator McArdle and which contained information McArdle had received from an informant. McArdle testified at the hearing that early on the morning of August 22, 1983, upon receiving the information from the informant, he prepared the memorandum for delivery to officers working a later shift. Defendant was arrested by those officers on the evening of August 22. McArdle further testified that the memorandum had been "routinely destroyed" by the police department.
Since the memorandum related to the subject matter of McArdle's testimony, it was discoverable by defendant (see, CPL 240.45; People v. Consolazio, 40 N.Y.2d 446, 387 N.Y.S.2d 62, 354 N.E.2d 801, cert. denied 433 U.S. 914, 97 S.Ct. 2986, 53 L.Ed.2d 1100; People v. Gilligan, 39 N.Y.2d 769, 384 N.Y.S.2d 778, 349 N.E.2d 879; People v. Rosario, 9 N.Y.2d 286, 213 N.Y.S.2d 448, 173 N.E.2d 881, rearg. denied 9 N.Y.2d 908, 216 N.Y.S.2d 1025, 176 N.E.2d 111, cert. denied 368 U.S. 866, 82 S.Ct. 117, 7 L.Ed.2d 64, rearg. denied 14 N.Y.2d 876, 252 N.Y.S.2d 1027, 200 N.E.2d 784, rearg. denied 15 N.Y.2d 765, 257 N.Y.S.2d 1027, 205 N.E.2d 538). The failure to produce the memorandum in the circumstances presented here, however, does not constitute reversible error. The record contains no suggestion that the memorandum was destroyed in bad faith to frustrate defendant's right to cross-examination (see, People v. Paranzino, 40 N.Y.2d 1005, 391 N.Y.S.2d 391, 359 N.E.2d 981; People v. Sirianni, 97 A.D.2d 938, 468 N.Y.S.2d 738). Moreover, defendant's counsel had a full opportunity to cross-examine McArdle and the other officers concerning the content of the memorandum and the specifics of the information received by McArdle from the informant (see, People v. Perez, 50 A.D.2d 908, 377 N.Y.S.2d 564).
Also without merit is defendant's claim that the search of his duffle bag was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Vasquez
...that the officer destroyed the notes in bad faith to frustrate the defendant's right to cross-examination ( see, People v. Jones, 130 A.D.2d 943, 516 N.Y.S.2d 142). The contents of the conversation, contained in the investigating detective's memo book, were disclosed to the defense prior to......
-
People v. Springer
...to frustrate the defendant's right to cross-examination (see, People v. Vasquez, 141 A.D.2d 880, 530 N.Y.S.2d 159; People v. Jones, 130 A.D.2d 943, 516 N.Y.S.2d 142). Thus, the omission does not require reversal of the judgment (see, People v. Martinez, 71 N.Y.2d 937, 528 N.Y.S.2d 813, 524 ......
-
People v. Best
...to frustrate the defendant's right to cross-examination (see, People v. Vasquez, 141 A.D.2d 880, 530 N.Y.S.2d 159; People v. Jones, 130 A.D.2d 943, 516 N.Y.S.2d 142, lv. denied 70 N.Y.2d 649, 518 N.Y.S.2d 1042, 512 N.E.2d We have reviewed the defendant's remaining contention and find it to ......
-
People v. Wallace
...examined (see, People v. Best, 145 A.D.2d 499, 535 N.Y.S.2d 108; People v. Vasquez, 141 A.D.2d 880, 530 N.Y.S.2d 159; People v. Jones, 130 A.D.2d 943, 516 N.Y.S.2d 142). Furthermore, we find no evidence of bad faith on the part of the police or the prosecution in this ...