People v. Hopkins
Opinion of the Court
—Judgment,
Contrary to defendant’s attack on his criminal contempt conviction, we find that the order of protection provided defendant with fair notice of the conduct that was prohibited. Although the box alongside Paragraph B of the order was not checked, the complainant’s name was inserted in the space following the language which provided that defendant would not threaten, annoy, harass or alarm such individual. Moreover, Paragraph A provided that defendant was to “stay away” from the complainant.
Defendant’s post-summation request for missing witness charges as to various persons was properly denied as untimely. In any event, the prerequisites for missing witness charges were not met. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Williams, Ellerin, Wallach and Friedman, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.