Legal Opinion
People v. Colon
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided June 3, 1996PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the hearing court properly permitted the People to call an additional witness to establish that the defendant waived his right to counsel at the lineup. The prosecutor’s motion to present further evidence was made before the hearing court rendered its decision and, under these circumstances, it was within the sound discretion of the hearing court to grant the motion (see, People v Harrington, 193 AD2d 756). We note that this situation is distinguishable from People v Havelka (45 NY2d 636), in which the People attempted to argue new points after losing…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- People v. Yut Wai TomNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
- People v. HavelkaNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- People v. HarringtonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- People v. ThomasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- People v. McCrimmonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. ColonNew York Court of Appeals · 1997
- People v. SuphalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- People v. TorresAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- People v. EllisonNew York Supreme Court · 2004
- People v. ColonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.