People v. ThomasPeople v. Thomas
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him, following a jury trial, of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [2]) and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (§ 265.02 [former (1)]), defendant contends that County Court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the indictment on the ground that he was denied the right to testify before the grand jury pursuant to CPL 190.50 (5) (a). We reject that contention. Such a motion “must be made not more than five days after the defendant has been arraigned upon the indictment” (CPL 190.50 [5] [c]; see People v Boodrow,
We reject defendant’s further contention that the court erred in allowing a witness to make an in-court identification of defendant in the absence of a CPL 710.30 notice or a hearing with respect to the pretrial identification procedure. Such a notice is required only when there has been a pretrial identification (see CPL 710.30 [1] [b]), and the witness in question was unable to identify defendant at the pretrial identification procedure (see People v Trammel,
Contrary to defendant’s further contention, viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crimes as charged to the jury (see People v Danielson,
The contention of defendant in his pro se supplemental brief concerning the alleged denial of effective assistance of counsel involves matters outside the record on appeal and thus is not reviewable on direct appeal (see People v Martina,