The prosecutor's limited questioning about the defense's opportunity to subpoena 911 tapes did not constitute improper burden-shifting in the particular circumstances of this case. Defendant's elicitation of testimony about the erasure of the tapes, and intimation that the People were responsible for the erasure, opened the door to the People's elicitation of the standard police procedures regarding erasure of unrequested tapes (see, People v Melendez,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
PEOPLE v. PAGAN
259 A.D.2d 270 (1999)
686 N.Y.S.2d 387
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JUAN PAGAN, Appellant.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided March 2, 1999.
Decided March 2, 1999.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
