Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996

People v. Antoneddy

People v. Antoneddy
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided April 15, 1996
226 A.D.2d 549; 641 N.Y.S.2d 95; 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4324
People v. Antoneddy

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered July 21, 1994, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (three counts), and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was not deprived of a fair trial as a result of being tried in absentia when he absconded before the commencement of trial (see, People v Parker, 57 NY2d 136; People v Roe, 196 AD2d 899, 900). The court did not err in denying defense counsel’s request for a missing witness charge concerning the undercover police officer who monitored the so-called "buy-and-bust” transaction for which the defendant was arrested. The undercover officer was unavailable to testify as a result of injuries received in an unrelated "buy-and-bust” operation during which, among other injuries, his jaw was broken in three places and had to be wired *550shut (see, People v Gonzalez, 68 NY2d 424; People v Shaw, 160 AD2d 1032, 1033; People v Aufiero, 139 AD2d 656, 657). Furthermore, the evidence in the record supports the court’s conclusion that the testimony of the uncalled witness would have been entirely cumulative (see, People v Kitching, 78 NY2d 532, 536-537; People v Fields, 76 NY2d 761, 763; People v Vasquez, 76 NY2d 722, 724; People v Erts, 73 NY2d 872, 874).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Balletta, J. P., Thompson, Santucci and Florio, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.