People v. Hattley

231 A.D.2d 531, 647 N.Y.S.2d 94, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8827

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kreindler, J.), rendered December 6, 1993, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

People v Ventimiglia (52 NY2d 350), requires that when the People wish to introduce evidence of a defendant’s uncharged crimes, "a prosecutor who intends to adduce [such evidence] before the jury should first obtain a ruling from the Trial Judge by offering the testimony out of the presence of the jury” [532]*532(People v Ventimiglia, supra, at 356). "Whether some time prior to trial, just before the trial begins or just before the witness testifies will depend upon the circumstances of the particular case” {supra, at 362). On the facts of this case, the court’s refusal to make an advance Ventimiglia ruling was a provident exercise of the court’s discretion {see, People v Randall, 177 AD2d 661; People v Linton, 166 AD2d 670).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Bracken, J. P., Copertino, Pizzuto and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Hattley, 231 A.D.2d 531, 647 N.Y.S.2d 94, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8827 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

231 A.D.2d 531 (People v. Hattley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Ventimiglia
420 N.E.2d 59 (New York Court of Appeals, 1981)
People v. Linton
166 A.D.2d 670 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
People v. Randall
177 A.D.2d 661 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)