People v. Hinchey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hinchey

86 A.D.2d 748, 447 N.Y.S.2d 775, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15312

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

DecidedJanuary 22, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 86 A.D.2d 748 (People v. Hinchey) 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. Hinchey, 86 A.D.2d 748, 447 N.Y.S.2d 775, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15312 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: While it was error to permit testimony of uncharged crimes, reversal is not warranted. The criminal activity testified to was not related to the crime charged and the improper testimony was limited to a single, isolated statement by the witness [749]*749(see People v Kelly, 38 AD2d 1004). In view of the overwhelming proof of defendant’s guilt, there is no significant probability that, but for the error, the jury would have acquitted (People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 242, 243). We have examined the other contentions raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Erie County Court, Wolfgang, J. — grand larceny, second degree.) Present — Simons, J. P., Hancock, Jr., Doerr, Denman and Schnepp, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: While it was error to permit testimony of uncharged crimes, reversal is not warranted. The criminal activity testified to was not related to the crime charged and the improper testimony was limited to a single, isolated statement by the witness [749]*749(see People v Kelly, 38 AD2d 1004). In view of the overwhelming proof of defendant’s guilt, there is no significant probability that, but for the error, the jury would have acquitted (People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 242, 243). We have examined the other contentions raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Erie County Court, Wolfgang, J. — grand larceny, second degree.) Present — Simons, J. P., Hancock, Jr., Doerr, Denman and Schnepp, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 A.D.2d 748, 447 N.Y.S.2d 775, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hinchey-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack