From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Brooks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 18, 2002
292 A.D.2d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

1998-09615

Argued March 1, 2002.

March 18, 2002.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Sampson, J.), rendered October 9, 1998, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (four counts) and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Murray E. Singer, Forest Hills, N.Y., for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, Donna Aldea, and James Dolan of counsel), for respondent.

Before: SONDRA MILLER, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, HOWARD MILLER, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.


ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's failure to base his speedy trial motion on the specific contentions that he now advances on appeal renders them unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Mazur, 186 A.D.2d 275). In any event, upon reviewing the record, we find that the total time chargeable to the prosecution was less than 182 days (see, CPL 30.30[a]; cf., People v. Diaz, 275 A.D.2d 652; People v. Bailey, 221 A.D.2d 296). Accordingly, the motion was properly denied (see, People v. Pittman, 282 A.D.2d 693).

The Supreme Court properly permitted one of the complainants to testify that the defendant called him several times after the robbery to apologize and ask him not to testify at trial (see, People v. Sides, 265 A.D.2d 907; People v. Whaley, 144 A.D.2d 510). However, the Supreme Court erred in allowing testimony concerning similar attempts by the defendant's sister to convince that complainant not to testify, as there was no showing that the defendant was in any way connected to his sister's actions (see, People v. Ramdowe, 204 A.D.2d 663; People v. Brabham, 77 A.D.2d 626). Nevertheless, the error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230; People v. Ramdowe, supra, at 664).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

S. MILLER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, H. MILLER and ADAMS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Brooks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 18, 2002
292 A.D.2d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

People v. Brooks

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. KORAN BROOKS, a/k/a DWAYNE GREEN…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 18, 2002

Citations

292 A.D.2d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
739 N.Y.S.2d 585

Citing Cases

Hogan v. West

The Court finds that New York state courts routinely and evenhandedly employ the contemporaneous objection…

People v. Juarez

The defendant appeals.The defendant correctly contends that the Supreme Court should not have allowed the…