People v. Colon
Cases that cite this one
4 later published cases cite this decision.
- People v. Baez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- People v. Lozada (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- People v. Martinez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1980)
- People v. Lloyd (N.Y. 1977)
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
Memorandum. Order affirmed. The informant was not a material witness to the actual drug transactions. The alibi defense was insufficient to cast a significant doubt on the police testimony of numerous direct meetings, conversations, and transactions with defendant. Moreover, the ex parte in camera testimony, received under a one-time practice no longer preferred, instead of offering a likelihood of obtaining exculpatory testimony from the informant bolstered the prosecution’s case. (See, generally, People v Goggins, 34 NY2d 163, 168-169, cert den 419 US 1012; see, also, People v Pena, 37 NY2d 642.) Hence, there was no error in the exercise of discretion by the trial court in protecting the identity of the informant, and thus his continued usefulness, and perhaps his safety.
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg, and Cooke concur.
Order affirmed in a memorandum.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.