Published on:

Commissioner of Investigation of the City of New York

In this Criminal case, defendant appealed from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

A Kings County Criminal lawyer said that there was no finding that defendant was improperly deprived of material at his trial. Given the inadequacy of this record, this issue would more appropriately be raised by way of a motion pursuant to CPL 440.10.

The trial court did not err in concluding that the interests of justice exception contained within CPL 60.42(5) did not warrant inquiry into the victim’s sexual abuse history. Moreover, the court’s ruling with respect to defense counsel’s questioning of the complainant regarding her alleged drug use and prostitution activities did not unduly infringe upon the defendant’s right of confrontation.

Nor did the court improvidently exercise its discretion in granting the People’s request to partially close the courtroom during the testimony of one of their witnesses. On the record before us we are satisfied that the court had before it sufficient facts so as to justify the closure of the courtroom to the defendant’s family during the brief testimony of one witness who had indicated that she had seen members of the defendant’s family in the courtroom and that she had been threatened by at least one of them.

The Court have examined the prosecutorial summation and conclude that the remarks complained of constituted fair comment on the evidence or were made in response to the defense summation.

The court likewise considered the defendant’s additional claims raised in his supplemental pro se brief and find them to be without merit.

In another criminal case, plaintiff applied for an order to take the deposition of the New York City Police Department by a member thereof, having knowledge of the facts, and requiring production of a letter alleged to have been written by the defendant landlord, to the Police Department, allegedly charging the plaintiff with running a house of prostitution at her apartment. The examination sought to enable plaintiff to frame a complaint in an action for libel which was started by the service of a summons.

A Kings County Prostitution attorney said that this application involves the question as to whether the rights of an individual to prove an alleged libel are superior to the public interest, in protecting informants, so that the Police Department and other agencies of government may not be compelled to disclose its sources of information.

In the case decided by the Court, it was stated inter alia:

‘Public policy will protect all such communications absolutely and without reference to motive, or intent of the informer, or the question of probable cause; the ground being that greater mischief will probably result from requiring or permitting them to be disclosed than from wholly rejecting them.’

Further, in another relevant case decided by the Supreme Court , which was an almost identical proceeding to the case at bar, wherein an inspector of the Building Department was seeking an examination before trial to secure information to frame a complaint, which information had been sent to the then Commissioner of Investigation by an owner of a building against which the plaintiff had filed a violation, the Court stated:

‘The highly confidential and investigative function performed by the Commissioner of Investigation of the City of New York has been clearly determined by the Court of Appeals. The very purpose of that office would be defeated if communications made to the Commissioner were subject to revelation at the suit of the affected individual. In this respect the Commissioner’s function is closely allied to that of the District Attorney or the police officer ‘

Accordingly, the Court denied the subject motion of this case.

Here in Stephen Bilkis and Associates, our diligent and hardworking lawyers are always available to hear your legal predicaments. Since criminal case involves penalties, our Kings County Criminal attorneys are observant and make it sure that your rights are protected. For sex-related cases like prostitution, we also have Kings County Prostitution lawyers who are ready to give their advice in case of need. Consult us now.

Posted in:
Published on:

Comments are closed.

Contact Information