Legal Opinion

People v. Brooks

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

Decided February 5, 1993PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant argues that reversal is required because a Sandoval hearing was held in his absence. We are unable to review that contention; the stipulated record makes no reference to a Sandoval hearing. The court’s finding that the undercover investigator had an independent basis for his in-court identification of defendant is supported by the record (see, People v Burgos, 107 AD2d 1041). Defendant’s pro se argument concerning prosecutorial misconduct is unpreserved and we decline to reach it in the interest of justice. We have examined defendant’s…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. People v. BurgosAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. People v. McGilvaryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API