Legal Opinion
People v. Queeglay
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 14, 1997PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.39) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and seventh degrees (Penal Law §§ 220.16, 220.03). We reject the contention that Supreme Court abused its discretion in denying defendant’s motion for an adjournment of the trial. "The decision whether to grant an adjournment is ordinarily committed to the sound discretion of the trial court” (People v Spears, 64 NY2d 698, 699).…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. BaldiNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
- People v. SatterfieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
- People v. SpearsNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- People v. FrazierAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- People v. HoukAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- People v. McNearAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- People v. RiveraAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- People v. PovioAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- People v. La VallaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000