New York Court of Appeals, 1987

People v. Saez

New York Court of Appeals · Decided February 12, 1987

69 N.Y.2d 802; 513 N.Y.S.2d 380; 505 N.E.2d 945; 1987 N.Y. LEXIS 15398

Cases that cite this one

75 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

People v. Ellison (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
SMITH, DEMARIO, PEOPLE v (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
People v. Smith (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
People v. Taylor (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
People v. Johnson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
People v. Morales (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
People v. Andujar (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2002)
People v. Branch (N.Y. 1994)
People v. Riggins (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1994)
People v. Barber (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)
People v. Laster (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1988)
People v. Camacho (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2025)
People v. Urena (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2024)
People v. Sams (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2023)
People v. Ramos (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
People v. Settles (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
People v. Baker (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
People v. Tendilla-Fuentes (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
People v. Ayotunji Akinlawon (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
People v. Bisnauth (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
People v. Grierson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
The People v. Oliver Berry (N.Y. 2016)
People v. Ayala (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
People v. Carrington (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
People v. Carrington (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

During their case-in-chief the People called the complainant to the stand. The complainant testified that defendant pulled an object wrapped in paper out of a box, stuck the object in complainant’s side, and demanded money. The complainant stated that he believed the object "was something [defendant] could harm me with * * * A revolver, a shotgun. Something like that”. Complainant, however, only contradicted his Grand Jury testimony, to the extent relevant, by testifying at trial that he never saw what the object was. There was another victim witness who testified to actually seeing the barrel of a shotgun.

*804The trial court erred in allowing the People to impeach the complainant with his Grand Jury testimony, in which he stated that he actually saw the barrel of the shotgun. A party may impeach its own witness if such witness’ testimony on a material fact tends to disprove the party’s position or affirmatively damages the party’s case (CPL 60.35 [1]; People v Fitzpatrick, 40 NY2d 44, 51). To establish the crime of robbery in the first degree, the People needed only to show that defendant displayed what appeared to be a revolver or shotgun (see, Penal Law § 160.15 [4]). It was not necessary to show that anyone actually saw a revolver or shotgun (see, People v Baskerville, 60 NY2d 374, 381). Therefore, although complainant’s testimony was not as strong as the People desired, it did not affirmatively damage their case by tending to disprove the essential element of the case: that defendant displayed what appeared to be a firearm.

In light of the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt, however, the error was harmless (see, People v Fuller, 50 NY2d 628, 638; People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 242). We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit.

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.