People v. Maymi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Maymi

198 A.D.2d 153, 603 N.Y.S.2d 862, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10982

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

DecidedNovember 23, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 198 A.D.2d 153 (People v. Maymi) 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. Maymi, 198 A.D.2d 153, 603 N.Y.S.2d 862, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10982 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Failla, J.), rendered July 2, 1991, which convicted defendant, after a jury trial, of rape in the first degree, and sentenced him, as a second felony offender, to a term of imprisonment of 6V2 to 13 years, unanimously affirmed.

The expert testimony regarding rape trauma syndrome was admissible to assist the jury in understanding why the victim told her boyfriend about the rape the day after it occurred but had refrained from telling her mother and the police until two weeks later as consistent with "patterns of response exhibited by rape victims” (People v Taylor, 75 NY2d 277, 293), and was not admitted for purposes of bolstering the victim’s testimony. The testimony also assisted the jury by explaining that the victim experienced psychological stress which was not apparent from her testimony. Thus, it supplied the jury with an explanation as to why someone who had been raped appeared to act in a manner inconsistent with the alleged incident (People v Van Loan, 179 AD2d 885, 886, lv denied 79 NY2d 1008). In any event, any prejudice was dissipated when the court instructed the jury, both after the expert finished testifying and in its main charge, that the testimony was not offered for the truth of the allegations (People v Story, 176 AD2d 1080, 1081, lv denied 79 NY2d 864).

We have considered defendant’s other claims and find them to be without merit. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Carro, Ellerin and Nardelli, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Failla, J.), rendered July 2, 1991, which convicted defendant, after a jury trial, of rape in the first degree, and sentenced him, as a second felony offender, to a term of imprisonment of 6V2 to 13 years, unanimously affirmed.

The expert testimony regarding rape trauma syndrome was admissible to assist the jury in understanding why the victim told her boyfriend about the rape the day after it occurred but had refrained from telling her mother and the police until two weeks later as consistent with "patterns of response exhibited by rape victims” (People v Taylor, 75 NY2d 277, 293), and was not admitted for purposes of bolstering the victim’s testimony. The testimony also assisted the jury by explaining that the victim experienced psychological stress which was not apparent from her testimony. Thus, it supplied the jury with an explanation as to why someone who had been raped appeared to act in a manner inconsistent with the alleged incident (People v Van Loan, 179 AD2d 885, 886, lv denied 79 NY2d 1008). In any event, any prejudice was dissipated when the court instructed the jury, both after the expert finished testifying and in its main charge, that the testimony was not offered for the truth of the allegations (People v Story, 176 AD2d 1080, 1081, lv denied 79 NY2d 864).

We have considered defendant’s other claims and find them to be without merit. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Carro, Ellerin and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 A.D.2d 153, 603 N.Y.S.2d 862, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10982, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-maymi-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack