From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Young

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 22, 1990
158 A.D.2d 398 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

February 22, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County, Carol Berkman, J., James Leff, J.


The denial of an evidentiary suppression hearing was not erroneous. The various papers in support of the motion did not include sufficient allegations of fact supporting the grounds advanced for the hearing. (CPL 710.60 [b]; People v Bostick, 100 A.D.2d 721.)

Neither was it an abuse of discretion to join the three indictments for trial. The facts alleged in each indictment were sufficiently similar to justify joinder. (CPL 200.20 [b], [c]; People v Lane, 56 N.Y.2d 1.) In any event, the defendant's vague and unspecific objection to consolidation did not preserve the issue for review. (People v Rivera, 73 N.Y.2d 941.)

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Carro, Kassal and Wallach, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Young

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 22, 1990
158 A.D.2d 398 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Young

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ROBERT YOUNG, Appellant

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

Date published: Feb 22, 1990

Citations

158 A.D.2d 398 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Citing Cases

People v. Terrell

Similarly, Defendant's alleged conduct in forcibly touching the complainant is intertwined with his other…