People v. Fuentes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Fuentes

19 A.D.3d 167, 798 N.Y.S.2d 376

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

DecidedJune 9, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 19 A.D.3d 167 (People v. Fuentes) 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. Fuentes, 19 A.D.3d 167, 798 N.Y.S.2d 376 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barbara F. Newman, J), rendered August 9, 2001, convicting defendant, after a [168]*168jury trial, of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of 9 to 18 years, unanimously affirmed.

Although we conclude that there was an insufficient basis for the admission of hearsay statements as background evidence explaining the course of events (compare People v Tosca, 98 NY2d 660 [2002]), we find the error to be harmless. This evidence did not suggest to the jury that any nontestifying declarants had relevant personal knowledge of the events in question, and there was overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt, including the credible testimony of the victim and her sister, along with medical evidence of repeated penetration. Defendant’s Confrontation Clause argument is unpreserved (People v Kello, 96 NY2d 740, 743-744 [2001]) and unavailing.

The prosecutor’s summation did not deprive defendant of a fair trial, and the court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s mistrial motion. Although the prosecutor made several inappropriate comments, the court’s curative actions were sufficient to prevent any prejudice (see People v Santiago, 52 NY2d 865 [1981]). In any event, were we to find any error, we would find it to be harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt. Concur-Mazzarelli, J.E, Andrias, Saxe, Marlow and Sullivan, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barbara F. Newman, J), rendered August 9, 2001, convicting defendant, after a [168]*168jury trial, of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of 9 to 18 years, unanimously affirmed.

Although we conclude that there was an insufficient basis for the admission of hearsay statements as background evidence explaining the course of events (compare People v Tosca, 98 NY2d 660 [2002]), we find the error to be harmless. This evidence did not suggest to the jury that any nontestifying declarants had relevant personal knowledge of the events in question, and there was overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt, including the credible testimony of the victim and her sister, along with medical evidence of repeated penetration. Defendant’s Confrontation Clause argument is unpreserved (People v Kello, 96 NY2d 740, 743-744 [2001]) and unavailing.

The prosecutor’s summation did not deprive defendant of a fair trial, and the court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s mistrial motion. Although the prosecutor made several inappropriate comments, the court’s curative actions were sufficient to prevent any prejudice (see People v Santiago, 52 NY2d 865 [1981]). In any event, were we to find any error, we would find it to be harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt. Concur-Mazzarelli, J.E, Andrias, Saxe, Marlow and Sullivan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 A.D.3d 167, 798 N.Y.S.2d 376, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fuentes-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack