People v. Bonilla

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bonilla

200 A.D.2d 369, 606 N.Y.S.2d 201, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 77

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 6, 1994·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court Bronx County (David Stadtmauer, J.), rendered February 18, 1992, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of two counts of attempted sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.65 [1]) and two counts of attempted sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.65 [3]), and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to four concurrent terms of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

The child victim’s statement to her sister one day after the incident was properly admitted as a "prompt outcry”, under the circumstances, including the child’s age and fear of defendant, who resided in her home (People v McDaniel, 81 NY2d 10, 17). While the child’s later statement to her mother should not have been admitted as a prompt outcry, there is no significant probability that this evidence, or any of the questions to which objections were sustained, influenced the verdict in this nonjury trial (People v D’Abate, 37 NY2d 922, 923-924). Concur — Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Judgment, Supreme Court Bronx County (David Stadtmauer, J.), rendered February 18, 1992, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of two counts of attempted sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.65 [1]) and two counts of attempted sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.65 [3]), and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to four concurrent terms of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

The child victim’s statement to her sister one day after the incident was properly admitted as a "prompt outcry”, under the circumstances, including the child’s age and fear of defendant, who resided in her home (People v McDaniel, 81 NY2d 10, 17). While the child’s later statement to her mother should not have been admitted as a prompt outcry, there is no significant probability that this evidence, or any of the questions to which objections were sustained, influenced the verdict in this nonjury trial (People v D’Abate, 37 NY2d 922, 923-924). Concur — Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.

People v. Bonilla, 200 A.D.2d 369, 606 N.Y.S.2d 201, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 77 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

200 A.D.2d 369 (People v. Bonilla) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related