People v. Morales

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Morales

724 N.E.2d 389, 262 A.D.2d 202, 693 N.Y.S.2d 11, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7387

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

DecidedJune 22, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 724 N.E.2d 389 (People v. Morales) 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. Morales, 724 N.E.2d 389, 262 A.D.2d 202, 693 N.Y.S.2d 11, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7387 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Martin Marcus, J.), rendered November 4, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of murder in the second degree and manslaughter in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 25 years to life and 12V2 to 25 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s mistrial motion based on inadvertently elicited references by two of the People’s witnesses to statements made by defendant’s codefendant implicating defendant in the murder. Rather than merely delivering a limiting instruction, the court [203]*203immediately struck the offending testimony in both instances. We conclude that the inadvertent introduction of this testimony was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Hamlin, 71 NY2d 751, 758), in view of the court’s curative actions and the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt, including his own comprehensive confessions and the wealth of circumstantial corroborating evidence. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Mazzarelli, Lerner, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Martin Marcus, J.), rendered November 4, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of murder in the second degree and manslaughter in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 25 years to life and 12V2 to 25 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s mistrial motion based on inadvertently elicited references by two of the People’s witnesses to statements made by defendant’s codefendant implicating defendant in the murder. Rather than merely delivering a limiting instruction, the court [203]*203immediately struck the offending testimony in both instances. We conclude that the inadvertent introduction of this testimony was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Hamlin, 71 NY2d 751, 758), in view of the court’s curative actions and the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt, including his own comprehensive confessions and the wealth of circumstantial corroborating evidence. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Mazzarelli, Lerner, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

724 N.E.2d 389, 262 A.D.2d 202, 693 N.Y.S.2d 11, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7387, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-morales-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack