The court properly denied defendant's mistrial motion based on the introduction of "surprise" evidence of purported uncharged crimes. The drug transactions in question constituted evidence of the charged crime of conspiracy. Moreover, defendant was on notice, through disclosure of the videotapes, that evidence of drug transactions with individuals other than the undercover officer would be introduced (see, People v Ribowsky,
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. McKNIGHT
281 A.D.2d 293 (2001)
722 N.Y.S.2d 152
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. PAUL McKNIGHT, Appellant.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided March 22, 2001.
Decided March 22, 2001.
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.
