Case ID: ad3d_87/html/0935-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v William Riley, Appellant.
    [929 NYS2d 856]
   The court properly denied defendant’s request for a missing witness charge. Defendant did not establish that the uncalled witness could have been expected to provide material and noncumulative testimony (see e.g. People v Arnold, 48 AD3d 239, 240-241 [2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 859 [2008]). Furthermore, the witness was, at most, a casual acquaintance of the victim; accordingly, the witness was not in the People’s control for purposes of such an instruction (see e.g. People v Nieves, 294 AD2d 152 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 700 [2002]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Andrias, J.P, Sweeny, Moskowitz, Richter and Román, JJ.