People v. Morales

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Morales

301 A.D.2d 368, 752 N.Y.S.2d 856, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 67

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

DecidedJanuary 7, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 301 A.D.2d 368 (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, 301 A.D.2d 368, 752 N.Y.S.2d 856, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 67 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lawrence Tonetti, J.), rendered June 22, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of arson in the second degree and unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to an aggregate term of 15 years, unanimously affirmed.

Testimony about defendant’s prior incarceration and purported threats to his ex-lover’s new boyfriend was “probative of defendant’s motive and intent, was inextricably interwoven with the narrative of events, and was necessary background to explain to the jury the relationship between” defendant and the victim (People v Santiago, 295 AD2d 214, 215, lv denied 98 NY2d 701; see also People v Footman, 297 AD2d 566; People v Steinberg, 170 AD2d 50, 72-74, affd 79 NY2d 673). Specifically, defendant’s incarceration was central to the events leading up to the charged crimes. While a curative instruction could have ameliorated any prejudice from the brief mention of defendant’s parole status, defendant specifically declined such relief, and did not seek any remedy other than a mistrial (see People v Young, 48 NY2d 995).

Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them. Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Rosenberger and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lawrence Tonetti, J.), rendered June 22, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of arson in the second degree and unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to an aggregate term of 15 years, unanimously affirmed.

Testimony about defendant’s prior incarceration and purported threats to his ex-lover’s new boyfriend was “probative of defendant’s motive and intent, was inextricably interwoven with the narrative of events, and was necessary background to explain to the jury the relationship between” defendant and the victim (People v Santiago, 295 AD2d 214, 215, lv denied 98 NY2d 701; see also People v Footman, 297 AD2d 566; People v Steinberg, 170 AD2d 50, 72-74, affd 79 NY2d 673). Specifically, defendant’s incarceration was central to the events leading up to the charged crimes. While a curative instruction could have ameliorated any prejudice from the brief mention of defendant’s parole status, defendant specifically declined such relief, and did not seek any remedy other than a mistrial (see People v Young, 48 NY2d 995).

Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them. Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Rosenberger and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

301 A.D.2d 368, 752 N.Y.S.2d 856, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 67, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-morales-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack