AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

THE PEOPLE, ETC., RESPONDENT, v. KATO JAKINS, A/K/A KATO JENKINS, APPELLANT. (IND. NO. 4989/96)

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The factual findings and credibility determinations of a hearing court are entitled to great deference on appeal, and will not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761; People v. Rose, 204 A.D.2d 745, 746). The hearing minutes support the denial of those branches of the defendant's omnibus motion which were to suppress identification testimony and statements made by him to law enforcement officials (see, People v. Gordon, 242 A.D.2d 640).

The trial court properly gave a missing witness charge with respect to the defendant's father on the ground that he could have provided noncumulative testimony on the material issue of whether there was justification for the defendant's assault on a Consolidated Edison meter reader (see, People v. Macana, 84 N.Y.2d 173; People v. Horn, 217 A.D.2d 406). The defendant failed to demonstrate that his father, who could have been expected to testify favorably to him, was unavailable to testify (see, People v. Mulero, 229 A.D.2d 402). The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. JAKINS
(Nov 13, 2000)