People v. Parsons
| Decision Date | 01 February 2019 |
| Docket Number | KA 15–01663,1240 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Andre PARSONS, Defendant–appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
169 A.D.3d 1425
91 N.Y.S.3d 825
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Andre PARSONS, Defendant–appellant.
1240
KA 15–01663
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Entered: February 1, 2019
TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (DREW R. DUBRIN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (SCOTT MYLES OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, DEJOSEPH, AND WINSLOW, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant was previously convicted after a jury trial of murder in the second degree ( Penal Law § 125.25[1] ), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (§ 265.03 [former (2) ] ), and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (§ 265.02 [former (4) ] ), arising from an incident involving a shooting in August 2001. He appealed, and this Court affirmed ( People v. Parsons, 13 A.D.3d 1099, 786 N.Y.S.2d 674 [4th Dept. 2004], lv. denied 4 N.Y.3d 801, 795 N.Y.S.2d 177, 828 N.E.2d 93 [2005], reconsideration denied 4 N.Y.3d 855, 797 N.Y.S.2d 429, 830 N.E.2d 328 [2005] ). In January 2009, defendant moved in County Court (Geraci, J.) to vacate the judgment of conviction pursuant to CPL 440.10(1)(c) and (h), alleging that the prosecutor knowingly presented false, material evidence at the trial and that the judgment was obtained in violation of his due process rights. The court denied the motion without a hearing. This Court reversed and remitted the matter for a hearing on defendant's motion ( People v. Parsons, 114 A.D.3d 1154, 979 N.Y.S.2d 893 [4th Dept. 2014] ). Defendant now appeals by permission of this Court from an order denying his motion after a hearing. Contrary
to defendant's contention, we conclude that County Court (Piampiano, J.) properly denied the motion.
Defendant contends that the court erred in denying the motion because he established that, at the time of the trial, the prosecutor knew that a witness had testified falsely before the grand jury and at trial and that the prosecutor failed to meet his Brady obligation to provide defendant with notice of that allegedly...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Borcyk
...on the court's superior opportunity to see the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v. Parsons , 169 A.D.3d 1425, 1426, 91 N.Y.S.3d 825 [4th Dept. 2019], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 980, 101 N.Y.S.3d 238, 124 N.E.3d 727 [2019] ). The majority rejects the court's credibili......
-
People v. Sipp, KA 17–00747
...harsh or severe.All concur except CARNI and DEJOSEPH , JJ., who dissent and vote to reverse in accordance with the following memorandum: 169 A.D.3d 1425We respectfully dissent because we disagree with the majority's conclusion that County Court did not err in refusing to charge the jury on ......
-
Ferguson v. Nat'l Gypsum Servs. Co.
...LLC, BUFFALO (ETHAN W. COLLINS OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF–RESPONDENT.PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CENTRA, NEMOYER, CURRAN, AND WINSLOW, JJ.91 N.Y.S.3d 825MEMORANDUM AND ORDER169 A.D.3d 1355It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the m......