People v. Capace

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Capace

273 A.D.2d 320, 710 N.Y.S.2d 529, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6469

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 12, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 273 A.D.2d 320 (People v. Capace) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Capace, 273 A.D.2d 320, 710 N.Y.S.2d 529, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6469 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (J. Goldberg, J.), rendered December 22, 1997, convicting him of murder in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The court properly admitted evidence of the defendant’s uncharged crimes since they were relevant on the issue of motive (see, People v Lewis, 69 NY2d 321, 325), necessary to complete the narrative (see, People v Gines, 36 NY2d 932; People v Bowden, 157 AD2d 789, 790), and were inextricably inter[321]*321twined with the crime charged (see, People v Vails, 43 NY2d 364, 368-369).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Ritter, J. P., Santucci, S. Miller and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (J. Goldberg, J.), rendered December 22, 1997, convicting him of murder in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The court properly admitted evidence of the defendant’s uncharged crimes since they were relevant on the issue of motive (see, People v Lewis, 69 NY2d 321, 325), necessary to complete the narrative (see, People v Gines, 36 NY2d 932; People v Bowden, 157 AD2d 789, 790), and were inextricably inter[321]*321twined with the crime charged (see, People v Vails, 43 NY2d 364, 368-369).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Ritter, J. P., Santucci, S. Miller and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

273 A.D.2d 320, 710 N.Y.S.2d 529, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-capace-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack