The People, etc., respondent, v. David Brown, appellant.

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

The People, etc., respondent, v. David Brown, appellant.

2011–04418 (Ind.No. 1728/10)

Decided: March 26, 2014

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P. RUTH C. BALKIN SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX JOSEPH J. MALTESE, JJ. Kevin Costello, Flushing, N.Y. (Kristen J. Dubowski of counsel), for appellant. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Nicoletta J. Caferri, and Merri Turk Lasky of counsel), for respondent.

Argued—February 6, 2014


Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lewis, J.), rendered April 18, 2011, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (four counts) and conspiracy in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.

For the reasons stated in connection with the appeal of a codefendant in People v. Thomas ( AD3d [decided herewith] ), the judgment of conviction must be reversed, and a new trial ordered.

Since a new trial is being ordered, we note that the defendant's contention that the Supreme Court's closure of the courtroom during the testimony of an undercover officer deprived him of his right to a public trial is without merit (see People v. Echevarria, 21 NY3d 1, 19, cert denied sub nom.   Johnson v. New York, _ _ U.S. _, 134 S Ct 823;  People v. Frost, 100 N.Y.2d 129, 137;  People v. Ramos, 90 N.Y.2d 490, 494, cert denied sub nom.  Ayala v. New York, 522 U.S. 1002).   Furthermore, the defendant's contention, raised in Point II of his main brief, is without merit.   The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental brief, are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit.



Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court

Copied to clipboard