People v. Fontenez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Fontenez

306 A.D.2d 129, 760 N.Y.S.2d 315, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6978

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

DecidedJune 17, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 306 A.D.2d 129 (People v. Fontenez) 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. Fontenez, 306 A.D.2d 129, 760 N.Y.S.2d 315, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6978 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey Atlas, J.), rendered March 8, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of murder in the first degree, four counts of murder in the second degree and two counts of kidnapping in the first degree, and sentencing him to life without parole on the first degree murder convictions, and 25-year terms on all other convictions, unanimously affirmed.

The court’s Sandoval ruling was a proper exercise of discretion in which the court carefully balanced the probative value of the convictions against the potential for undue prejudice (see People v Hayes, 97 NY2d 203 [2002]; People v Walker, 83 NY2d 455, 458-459 [1994]; People v Pavao, 59 NY2d 282, 292 [1983]). Defendant’s prior convictions demonstrated his willingness to put his interests above those of society, and the court precluded certain particularly prejudicial details.

The court’s responses to the jury’s questions were meaningful and appropriately conveyed to the jury the proper standards concerning voluntariness of statements, as applicable to the facts of the case (see People v Malloy, 55 NY2d 296 [1982], cert denied 459 US 847 [1982]; see also CPL 60.45 [2] [b] [i]). The court made it clear that an involuntary statement is to be disregarded even if truthful, and gave the jury suitable guid[130]*130anee for dealing with a fact pattern in which part of a statement could be found to be voluntary and another part found to be involuntary.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Rosenberger, Ellerin and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey Atlas, J.), rendered March 8, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of murder in the first degree, four counts of murder in the second degree and two counts of kidnapping in the first degree, and sentencing him to life without parole on the first degree murder convictions, and 25-year terms on all other convictions, unanimously affirmed.

The court’s Sandoval ruling was a proper exercise of discretion in which the court carefully balanced the probative value of the convictions against the potential for undue prejudice (see People v Hayes, 97 NY2d 203 [2002]; People v Walker, 83 NY2d 455, 458-459 [1994]; People v Pavao, 59 NY2d 282, 292 [1983]). Defendant’s prior convictions demonstrated his willingness to put his interests above those of society, and the court precluded certain particularly prejudicial details.

The court’s responses to the jury’s questions were meaningful and appropriately conveyed to the jury the proper standards concerning voluntariness of statements, as applicable to the facts of the case (see People v Malloy, 55 NY2d 296 [1982], cert denied 459 US 847 [1982]; see also CPL 60.45 [2] [b] [i]). The court made it clear that an involuntary statement is to be disregarded even if truthful, and gave the jury suitable guid[130]*130anee for dealing with a fact pattern in which part of a statement could be found to be voluntary and another part found to be involuntary.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Rosenberger, Ellerin and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

306 A.D.2d 129, 760 N.Y.S.2d 315, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6978, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fontenez-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack