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. Cedric Miller, appellant.
Argued-March 3, 2011
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Guzman, J.), rendered April 14, 2009, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
As correctly conceded by the People, the trial court erred in failing to grant the defendant's request to instruct the jury that an eyewitness is not obligated to come forward to law enforcement officials upon learning of the defendant's arrest (see People v. Dawson, 50 N.Y.2d 311; People v. Bryan, 55 AD3d 921; People v. Paasewe, 276 A.D.2d 807; People v. Casseus, 199 A.D.2d 525; People v. Allen, 177 A.D.2d 700; People v. Reed, 83 A.D.2d 645). However, under the circumstances, the error was harmless (see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230; People v. Archie, 200 A.D.2d 676; People v. Davis, 172 A.D.2d 553).
The defendant was not deprived of his right to a public trial (see US Const, 6th Amend; Civil Rights Law § 12; Judiciary Law § 4; People v. Jones, 96 N.Y.2d 213). Although the defendant initially objected to the exclusion of his girlfriend during an undercover officer's testimony, defense counsel subsequently withdrew this objection in the defendant's presence. Accordingly, the defendant waived his right to have his girlfriend present during this portion of the trial (see People v. Moody, 300 A.D.2d 510; People v. Roque, 291 A.D.2d 417).
The defendant was afforded meaningful representation (see People v. Caban, 5 NY3d 143, 152; People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708; People v. Rand, 58 AD3d 758).
DILLON, J.P., LEVENTHAL, CHAMBERS and AUSTIN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Matthew G. Kiernan
Clerk of 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.
Docket No: 2009-04684 (Ind.No. 7284 /07)
Decided: March 22, 2011
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)