People v. Nieves

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Nieves

51 A.D.3d 1042, 857 N.Y.S.2d 502, 2008 NY Slip Op 4889, 2008 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4604

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 27, 2008·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Chambers, J.), rendered May 11, 2006, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s claim that he was denied a fair trial when the court permitted the prosecutor to introduce evidence of the defendant’s prior bad act is preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]). However, any error in admitting the evidence was harmless because the evidence of the defendant’s guilt was overwhelming and there is no significant probability that, had it not been for the alleged error, the jury would have acquitted the defendant (see People v Jackson, 8 NY3d 869, 871 [2007]; People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230 [1975]). Rivera, J.P., Covello, Angiolillo and McCarthy, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Chambers, J.), rendered May 11, 2006, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s claim that he was denied a fair trial when the court permitted the prosecutor to introduce evidence of the defendant’s prior bad act is preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]). However, any error in admitting the evidence was harmless because the evidence of the defendant’s guilt was overwhelming and there is no significant probability that, had it not been for the alleged error, the jury would have acquitted the defendant (see People v Jackson, 8 NY3d 869, 871 [2007]; People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230 [1975]). Rivera, J.P., Covello, Angiolillo and McCarthy, JJ., concur.

People v. Nieves, 51 A.D.3d 1042, 857 N.Y.S.2d 502, 2008 NY Slip Op 4889, 2008 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4604 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

51 A.D.3d 1042 (People v. Nieves) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related