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, etc., Respondent, v. Carlos NEGRONI, Appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hall, J.), rendered June 26, 1998, convicting him of murder in the second degree and attempted murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that reversal is warranted because the prosecutor cross-examined him regarding his whereabouts on the day of the shooting, and improperly commented during summation about his failure to call witnesses to corroborate his claim that he was not at the crime scene. We disagree. The defendant opened the door to the subject line of cross-examination when he testified that he never returned to the deceased victim's apartment after an argument with her boyfriend about two weeks before the shooting. The defendant further testified that he was residing with his sister on the day of the shooting, and on cross- and redirect examination he added that he was at his sister's apartment caring for her children when the crime was committed. Since the defendant elected to come forward with this evidence to establish that he could not have been at the deceased victim's apartment when the shooting occurred, there is no merit to his argument that the prosecutor impermissibly shifted the burden of proof by directing the jury's attention to his failure to call witnesses who could have been expected to corroborate his testimony (see, People v. Tankleff, 84 N.Y.2d 992, 622 N.Y.S.2d 503, 646 N.E.2d 805; People v. Ruine, 258 A.D.2d 278, 685 N.Y.S.2d 47; People v. Overlee, 236 A.D.2d 133, 142-143, 666 N.Y.S.2d 572; People v. Smith, 190 A.D.2d 522, 593 N.Y.S.2d 22).
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: February 05, 2001
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)