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, Respondent, v. Wallace OWENS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Denis Boyle, J. at suppression hearing; Richard Price, J. at jury trial and sentence), rendered February 6, 1997, convicting defendant of burglary in the second degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 71/212 to 15 years, 31/212 to 7 years and 1 year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant's suppression motion was properly denied. The prompt, on-the-scene showup was not rendered unduly suggestive by the circumstances that defendant was in handcuffs while guarded by police and accompanied by his codefendant, or by the witness's awareness of the obvious fact that the purpose of the showup was to view a possible suspect (see, People v. Duuvon, 77 N.Y.2d 541, 569 N.Y.S.2d 346, 571 N.E.2d 654; People v. Smith, 271 A.D.2d 332, 707 N.Y.S.2d 154, lv. denied 95 N.Y.2d 871, 715 N.Y.S.2d 226, 738 N.E.2d 374).
The verdict as to each count was based on legally sufficient evidence.
The court properly denied defendant's challenges for cause to various prospective jurors. The prospective jurors did not express any doubts about their ability to be fair and each juror's responses established his or her impartiality (see, People v. Johnson, 94 N.Y.2d 600, 709 N.Y.S.2d 134, 730 N.E.2d 932).
The court's adverse inference instruction was sufficient to prevent any prejudice from the erasure of a 911 tape (see, People v. Martinez, 71 N.Y.2d 937, 940, 528 N.Y.S.2d 813, 524 N.E.2d 134). Moreover, defendant was given a copy of the sprint report of the tape.
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: April 17, 2001
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)