People v. Williams
| Decision Date | 24 November 1997 |
| Parties | , 1997 N.Y. Slip Op. 10,746 The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Desmond WILLIAMS, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Judith E. Permutt, Scarsdale, for appellant.
Jeanine Pirro, District Attorney, White Plains (Mary E. Costello and Maryanne Luciano, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MILLER, J.P., and RITTER, ALTMAN and KRAUSMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Angiolillo, J.), rendered May 2, 1994, convicting him of rape in the first degree (five counts) and sodomy in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that his conviction should be vacated because he was denied his right to a speedy trial pursuant to CPL 30.30 is without merit. The trial court correctly concluded that the delays occasioned by the necessity of obtaining blood and saliva samples from the defendant and his two codefendants, performing the genetic tests, and obtaining the written results of those analyses were exceptional circumstances within the meaning of CPL 30.30(4)(g)(i) (see, People v. Washington, 43 N.Y.2d 772, 774, 401 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 372 N.E.2d 795).
The trial court properly determined that an audiotape of a telephone call to the 911 emergency number placed by the victim shortly after the incident was admissible as an excited utterance (see, People v. Palmer, 237 A.D.2d 311, 655 N.Y.S.2d 380; People v. Lewis, 222 A.D.2d 1058, 635 N.Y.S.2d 872; see also, People v. Brown, 70 N.Y.2d 513, 522 N.Y.S.2d 837, 517 N.E.2d 515). Moreover, the audiotape was properly authenticated (see, People v. Ely, 68 N.Y.2d 520, 527-528, 510 N.Y.S.2d 532, 503 N.E.2d 88).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pena v. Bellnier
...circumstances' pursuant to CPL 30.30(4)(g)." People v. Robinson, 850 N.Y.S.2d 533, 534 (2d Dep't 2008); see also People v. Williams, 665 N.Y.S.2d 87, 88 (2d Dep't 1997) ("The trial court correctly concluded that the delays occasioned by the necessity of obtaining blood and saliva samples fr......
-
People v. Ocasio
...delay for the purpose of obtaining DNA results was an exceptional circumstance, excludable under CPL 30.30(4)(g). In People v. Williams, 244 A.D.2d 587, 665 N.Y.S.2d 87 (2d Dept. 1997), for example, the Appellate Division held that a four and one half month delay to obtain blood and saliva ......
-
Porter v. State
...also Allison v. State, 661 So.2d 889 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1995); State v. King, 604 So.2d 661 (La.Ct.App.1992); People v. Williams, 244 A.D.2d 587, 665 N.Y.S.2d 87 (N.Y.App.Div.1997), appeal denied, 91 N.Y.2d 899, 669 N.Y.S.2d 13, 691 N.E.2d 1039 In Yamobi v. State, 672 N.E.2d 1344 (Ind.1996), ......
-
People v. Gonzalez
...be considered an exceptional circumstance, so long as the People exercised due diligence to obtain the results (People v. Williams, 244 A.D.2d 587, 665 N.Y.S.2d 87 [2d Dept.1997], lv. denied 91 N.Y.2d 899, 669 N.Y.S.2d 13, 691 N.E.2d 1039 [1998] ).Acknowledging that "[t]here is no precise d......