Legal Opinion

People v. Hough

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided September 24, 2002PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s mistrial motion made when the People revealed, *576during trial, that a statistical sampling method had been used to test the drugs in question. The People complied with the disclosure requirements of CPL 240.20 (1) (c) by timely disclosure of the laboratory report, and there is no requirement to disclose the testing methodology employed. In any event, the report did provide some indication of the method employed. Testing of drugs by statistical sampling is not novel (see People v Argro, 37 NY2d 929; People v Barnes, 249 AD2d 227,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. ArgroNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
  2. People v. BarnesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
  3. People v. ThurmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Alix v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 2007

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API