Opinion
April 6, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Corrado, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Harry Surujlall and his brother Gopaul Surujlall testified at trial that on the night of May 29, 1992, they went to a nightclub with their friend. A dispute began inside the club, which was subsequently continued on the street. During the latter escalation, Gopaul told the friend to go to the car. After she left, the defendant accosted the Surujlalls and shot them both. Some two months later, both Surujlalls identified the defendant in a lineup.
The court did not err in refusing to give a missing witness charge because of the friend's failure to testify. The defendant failed to make a prima facie showing on the record that the proposed witness was knowledgeable about a material issue pending in the case or was in the control of the People ( see, e.g, People v. Dianda, 70 N.Y.2d 894; People v. Aguaro, 241 A.D.2d 459; People v. Roberts, 201 A.D.2d 748).
The court also properly denied the defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment pursuant to CPL 30.30. The defendant served his motion and made it returnable on the first day of trial, so that there was no reasonable notice to the People ( see, CPL 210.45; People v. Lawrence, 64 N.Y.2d 200, 203; People v. Baxter, 216 A.D.2d 931; People v. Harvall, 196 A.D.2d 553, 554; People v. Weaver, 162 A.D.2d 486, 487).
The defendant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05; People v. Maschi, 49 N.Y.2d 784) and, in any event, without merit ( see, e.g., People v. Jackson, 235 A.D.2d 494).
Miller, J.P., Sullivan, Pizzuto and Friedmann, JJ., concur.