People v. Naranjo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Naranjo

225 A.D.2d 392, 640 N.Y.2d 13, 640 N.Y.S.2d 13, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2725

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 19, 1996·Published

Opinion

Defendant’s "inferential bolstering” claim is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review it, we would find that any "inferential bolstering” error that may have occurred in this case was rendered harmless by the overwhelming evidence of guilt (People v Johnson, 57 NY2d 969).

We find that the sentence was not unduly influenced by the court’s consideration of an uncharged crime (see, People v Migliore, 150 AD2d 169, lv denied 74 NY2d 815), and was otherwise a proper exercise of discretion. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Rosenberger, Ross and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Defendant’s "inferential bolstering” claim is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review it, we would find that any "inferential bolstering” error that may have occurred in this case was rendered harmless by the overwhelming evidence of guilt (People v Johnson, 57 NY2d 969).

We find that the sentence was not unduly influenced by the court’s consideration of an uncharged crime (see, People v Migliore, 150 AD2d 169, lv denied 74 NY2d 815), and was otherwise a proper exercise of discretion. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Rosenberger, Ross and Mazzarelli, JJ.

People v. Naranjo, 225 A.D.2d 392, 640 N.Y.2d 13, 640 N.Y.S.2d 13, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2725 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

225 A.D.2d 392 (People v. Naranjo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related