People v. Hyatt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hyatt

38 A.D.3d 233, 831 N.Y.S.2d 152

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

DecidedMarch 6, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 38 A.D.3d 233 (People v. Hyatt) 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. Hyatt, 38 A.D.3d 233, 831 N.Y.S.2d 152 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce Allen, J.), rendered August 3, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first degree (two counts), robbery in the second degree (two counts) and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to an aggregate term of 14 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant did not preserve his argument that the court should have instructed the jury not to consider evidence of his guilt of one of the two separate incidents as evidence of his guilt of the other, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find it to be without merit, because the court did instruct the jury to reach a separate determination as to each count, and because an instruction against “commingling” of evidence would have been erroneous in this case. The evidence as to each robbery tended to prove the other, because the two robberies shared a pattern that was sufficiently distinctive so as to warrant an inference that they were committed by the same person (see People v Beam, 57 NY2d 241, 253 [1982]). Concur—Tom, J.P, Sullivan, Williams, Buckley and Kavanagh, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce Allen, J.), rendered August 3, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first degree (two counts), robbery in the second degree (two counts) and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to an aggregate term of 14 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant did not preserve his argument that the court should have instructed the jury not to consider evidence of his guilt of one of the two separate incidents as evidence of his guilt of the other, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find it to be without merit, because the court did instruct the jury to reach a separate determination as to each count, and because an instruction against “commingling” of evidence would have been erroneous in this case. The evidence as to each robbery tended to prove the other, because the two robberies shared a pattern that was sufficiently distinctive so as to warrant an inference that they were committed by the same person (see People v Beam, 57 NY2d 241, 253 [1982]). Concur—Tom, J.P, Sullivan, Williams, Buckley and Kavanagh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.3d 233, 831 N.Y.S.2d 152, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hyatt-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack