From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Castro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 19, 2002
291 A.D.2d 292 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

273

February 19, 2002.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura Drager, J. at pretrial severance motion; William Leibovitz, J. at jury trial and sentence), rendered December 19, 1996, convicting defendant of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first and third degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 15 years to life and 8 to 16 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

BARBARA JANE HUTTER, for respondent.

NATALIE REA, for defendant-appellant.

Before: Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Sullivan, Rosenberger, Friedman, JJ.


After a thorough hearing, the court properly determined that, through no fault of the People and despite their reasonably diligent efforts to produce him, the confidential informant was unavailable to testify at trial (see, People v. Jenkins, 41 N.Y.2d 307). The informant could not be located and, when he spoke to a police sergeant by telephone without revealing his location, he clearly stated that he was unwilling to testify due to fear for his safety and that of his family (see, People v. Carpenito, 171 A.D.2d 45, affd 80 N.Y.2d 65). Furthermore, the court correctly concluded that defendant had not met his burden of demonstrating that the proposed testimony of the informant would have been exculpatory or could create a reasonable doubt (see, People v. Lesiuk, 81 N.Y.2d 485; People v. Jenkins, supra). Under these circumstances, the court properly declined to issue a missing witness charge since the informant was unavailable and there was no showing that he could have provided material testimony (see, People v. Gonzalez, 68 N.Y.2d 424).

Defendant's severance motion, made prior to trial and renewed during trial, was properly denied. Despite some conflict in the trial testimony of defendant and the codefendant, who was acquitted, the cores of their respective defenses were not so irreconcilable as to require a severance, and there is no indication that the jury inferred defendant's guilt from this conflict in testimony (see, People v. Mahboubian, 74 N.Y.2d 174, 184; People v. Castro-Restrepo, 169 A.D.2d 454, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 993).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Castro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 19, 2002
291 A.D.2d 292 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

People v. Castro

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. MARIO CASTRO…

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

Date published: Feb 19, 2002

Citations

291 A.D.2d 292 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
737 N.Y.S.2d 605

Citing Cases

Castro v. Fisher

Castro's counsel originally filed an omnibus motion on March 11, 1996, soon after the grand jury indictment,…

People v. Williford

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. The trial court did not err in denying the motion to sever the trial…