Summary
This Appellate Division, Second Department decision affirms the defendant’s conviction for two counts of endangering the welfare of a child following a jury verdict. The court rejected the defendant’s arguments regarding the improper joinder and denial of a motion to sever the indictment counts, finding the proof for one count was admissible as evidence for the others under CPL 200.20(2)(b). Additionally, the court upheld the trial court’s denial of a requested missing witness charge against a police officer, concluding the defendant failed to demonstrate the officer’s material knowledge or favorable testimony.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the County Court erred in denying the motion to sever count 1 from counts 2 and 3 under CPL 200.20(2)(b).
- Whether the County Court erred in denying the defendant’s request for a missing‑witness charge.
Holdings
- The denial was proper because the counts were properly joined under CPL 200.20(2)(b) and the court lacked authority to sever them.
- The denial was proper because the defendant failed to satisfy the statutory burden for a missing‑witness charge.
Factual background
The defendant was convicted by a jury of two counts of endangering the welfare of a child. He moved to sever one count from the others and to obtain a missing‑witness charge against a police officer, both of which were denied by the trial court.
Procedural history
The County Court convicted the defendant of two counts of endangering the welfare of a child and sentenced him. The defendant appealed, challenging the denial of a motion to sever counts and the denial of a missing‑witness charge.