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. Mark FISHER, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (DeRiggi, J.), rendered June 3, 1998, convicting him of assault in the second degree, resisting arrest, and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The court properly summarily denied the defendant's oral motion to set aside the jury's verdict of guilt on the basis of newly-discovered evidence since the defendant failed to comply with the requirements that the motion be in writing, upon reasonable notice, and supported by sworn allegations of fact (see, CPL 330.30[3], 330.40[2][a] ). Additionally, the defendant failed to establish that the evidence “could not have been produced by the defendant at the trial” (CPL 330.30[3]; see, People v. Salemi, 309 N.Y. 208, 128 N.E.2d 377, cert. denied 350 U.S. 950, 76 S.Ct. 325, 100 L.Ed. 827; People v. Rivera, 118 A.D.2d 877, 500 N.Y.S.2d 181). Finally, the newly-discovered evidence alleged by the defendant, a blood-stained tee-shirt, would not have contradicted the People's witnesses' testimony that he sustained trauma to his nose (see, People v. Coleman, 142 A.D.2d 586, 530 N.Y.S.2d 242).
The trial court also properly denied the defendant's objection to testimony concerning statements that he allegedly made at the time of or immediately preceding the crimes charged (see, CPL 710.30; People v. Rodney, 85 N.Y.2d 289, 624 N.Y.S.2d 95, 648 N.E.2d 471; People v. Copes, 200 A.D.2d 680, 606 N.Y.S.2d 751; People v. Wells, 133 A.D.2d 385, 519 N.Y.S.2d 553; People v. Mayi, 198 A.D.2d 444, 605 N.Y.S.2d 909; People v. Clark, 198 A.D.2d 46, 603 N.Y.S.2d 450; People v. Holloway, 77 A.D.2d 122, 432 N.Y.S.2d 905; cf., People v. Kirkland, 89 N.Y.2d 903, 653 N.Y.S.2d 256, 675 N.E.2d 1208).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit (see, Penal Law § 205.30; cf., People v. Brown, 256 A.D.2d 414, 682 N.Y.S.2d 229).
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
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: November 08, 1999
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)