People v. Marsh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Marsh

264 A.D.2d 647, 696 N.Y.S.2d 14, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9300

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

DecidedSeptember 23, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 264 A.D.2d 647 (People v. Marsh) 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. Marsh, 264 A.D.2d 647, 696 N.Y.S.2d 14, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9300 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Richard Price, J.), rendered March 9, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 11 years and 1 year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

To the extent that the challenged rebuttal testimony was relevant to the ability of the defense witness to perceive and remember events, such evidence was not collateral and the court properly exercised its discretion to receive it (see, People v Ortiz, 40 AD2d 857, 858). In any event, even were we to find that any of the rebuttal testimony was collateral and thus improperly received, we would find the error to be harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt.

The evidence of physical injury under the robbery count was legally sufficient and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. Evidence that the complainant’s lip was swollen and “busted”, that he attempted to stop the bleeding by applying a tissue, that he applied ice on the night of the injury, and that his lip hurt for three or four days when he ate, provided ample proof of physical injury (see, People v Guidice, 83 NY2d 630, 636; Matter of O’Shanna T., 238 AD2d 287). Concur— Rubin, J. P., Andrias, Saxe, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Richard Price, J.), rendered March 9, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 11 years and 1 year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

To the extent that the challenged rebuttal testimony was relevant to the ability of the defense witness to perceive and remember events, such evidence was not collateral and the court properly exercised its discretion to receive it (see, People v Ortiz, 40 AD2d 857, 858). In any event, even were we to find that any of the rebuttal testimony was collateral and thus improperly received, we would find the error to be harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt.

The evidence of physical injury under the robbery count was legally sufficient and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. Evidence that the complainant’s lip was swollen and “busted”, that he attempted to stop the bleeding by applying a tissue, that he applied ice on the night of the injury, and that his lip hurt for three or four days when he ate, provided ample proof of physical injury (see, People v Guidice, 83 NY2d 630, 636; Matter of O’Shanna T., 238 AD2d 287). Concur— Rubin, J. P., Andrias, Saxe, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 A.D.2d 647, 696 N.Y.S.2d 14, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9300, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-marsh-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack