| People v McRae |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 03750 [62 AD3d 723] |
| May 5, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v TroyMcRae, Appellant. |
—[*1] Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Rhea A. Grob ofcounsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Collini, J.),rendered May 24, 2006, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, andimposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the trial court improvidently exercised its discretion indenying his request for an adjournment to enable him to secure the attendance of a witness whoallegedly would impeach the credibility of the complaining witness is without merit. Thedetermination whether to grant an adjournment is committed to the sound discretion of the trialcourt (see People v Spears, 64 NY2d 698, 699-700 [1984]). Further, absent a showing ofprejudice, the court's denial of a request for an adjournment will not be disturbed (see Peoplev Arroyo, 161 AD2d 1127 [1990]). Here, the defendant wanted to call a witness whosetestimony would have been on a collateral matter (see People v Inniss, 83 NY2d 653,658 [1994]). Thus, the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying therequest for an adjournment (see People v Chen Liu, 244 AD2d 352 [1997]).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).[*2]
The defendant's remaining contentions, including thoseraised in his supplemental pro se brief, are without merit. Rivera, J.P., Covello, Dickerson andChambers, JJ., concur.