Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Appellant, v. Vance COLLINS, Defendant-Respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Joseph Fisch, J.), entered on or about May 30, 1997, granting defendant's motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 to set aside a judgment, same court and Justice, rendered February 6, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of sodomy in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 9 to 18 years, unanimously affirmed.
While we agree with the People that they had no affirmative duty to ascertain whether the complainant in the underlying case had a psychiatric history and that they thus committed no Brady violation in failing to provide defendant with the complainant's psychiatric records (see, People v. Sealey, 239 A.D.2d 864, 659 N.Y.S.2d 639), we conclude that the motion to vacate judgment was properly granted on the ground of newly discovered evidence (CPL 440.10[1][g] ). The complainant was the only eyewitness and her testimony contained material inconsistencies. Following defendant's 1995 conviction, the complainant was arrested in March 1996 after a much publicized incident wherein, without provocation, she slashed a subway rider in the face with a box cutter. As a result, defendant learned for the first time, and medical and other records confirmed, that the complainant had a long-standing history of mental illness and violent assaultive behavior, including psychiatric hospitalization and an incident wherein she stabbed an individual, all of which predated the 1993 underlying incident and her 1994 testimony at trial. Under the circumstances, we agree with the trial court that defendant satisfied the requirements set forth in CPL 440.10(1)(g) (see, People v. Rensing, 14 N.Y.2d 210, 250 N.Y.S.2d 401, 199 N.E.2d 489), and conclude that the court properly exercised its discretion (see, People v. Bryce, 88 N.Y.2d 124, 128, 643 N.Y.S.2d 516, 666 N.E.2d 221) in granting the motion.
We have considered the People's remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: May 05, 1998
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)