People v. Gagliardo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gagliardo

307 A.D.2d 934, 762 N.Y.S.2d 890, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8579

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 4, 2003·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J.), rendered April 19, 2002, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]).

With respect to the claim that the trial court erroneously admitted evidence of the defendant’s prior bad acts, the defendant either did not object to the alleged errors at trial and, consequently, did not preserve the claim for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]), or opened the door to the alleged errors by interjecting the uncharged crimes during his direct examination (see People v Watts, 154 AD2d 723 [1989]; People v Gibbs, 286 AD2d 865 [2001]; People v Ayala, 165 AD2d 878 [1990]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either without merit or do not require reversal. Prudenti, P.J., Townes, Mastro and Rivera, 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 County Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J.), rendered April 19, 2002, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]).

With respect to the claim that the trial court erroneously admitted evidence of the defendant’s prior bad acts, the defendant either did not object to the alleged errors at trial and, consequently, did not preserve the claim for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]), or opened the door to the alleged errors by interjecting the uncharged crimes during his direct examination (see People v Watts, 154 AD2d 723 [1989]; People v Gibbs, 286 AD2d 865 [2001]; People v Ayala, 165 AD2d 878 [1990]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either without merit or do not require reversal. Prudenti, P.J., Townes, Mastro and Rivera, JJ., concur.

People v. Gagliardo, 307 A.D.2d 934, 762 N.Y.S.2d 890, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8579 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

307 A.D.2d 934 (People v. Gagliardo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related