Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Lewis Hill, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2005-05-10
Citations: 4 N.Y.3d 876
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lewis Hill, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 4
Pages: 876–877

Head Matter:
[832 NE2d 22, 799 NYS2d 166]
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lewis Hill, Appellant.
Decided May 10, 2005
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Center for Appellate Litigation, New York City (Jan Hoth of counsel), for appellant.
Robert T Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Allen H. Saperstein of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Contrary to defendant's claims, the trial court's preclusion of defendant's expert from conducting a psychiatric examination in support of defendant's insanity defense (CPL 250.10 [1] [a]) to a second degree murder charge did not constitute an abuse of discretion. Defendant did not request the examination or announce his intention to pursue an insanity defense until the start of jury selection, having previously stated that, for tactical reasons, he would not do so. Under CPL 250.10 (2), the insanity defense is barred unless timely notice is given to prevent detrimental surprise to the prosecution (see People v Almonor, 93 NY2d 571, 581 [1999]). Defendant's untimely notice thwarts CPL 250.10's intended promotion of procedural order, proper notification and adversarial examination (see id. at 577-578). Under these facts, the trial court acted within its discretion in precluding the expert examination.
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith 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.