People v. Nowlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Nowlin

192 A.D.2d 354, 596 N.Y.S.2d 34, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3514

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

DecidedApril 8, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 192 A.D.2d 354 (People v. Nowlin) 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. Nowlin, 192 A.D.2d 354, 596 N.Y.S.2d 34, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3514 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Edward Davidowitz, J.), rendered September 28, 1990, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of sodomy in the second degree, attempted sodomy in the second degree and three counts of sexual abuse in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent prison terms of 3 to 6 years on the sodomy charge and 1 year for each of the sexual abuse charges, with a consecutive prison term of 2 to 4 years on the attempted sodomy charge, unanimously affirmed.

The defendant was not denied a fair trial by the admission of hearsay testimony under the prompt outcry exception. The testimony was admitted for the limited purpose of establishing the complainant’s credibility, and the jury was properly instructed to consider that evidence for that limited purpose (People v Rice, 75 NY2d 929, 931-932). We also find that the defendant’s sentence was not excessive. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Wallach and Kassal, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Edward Davidowitz, J.), rendered September 28, 1990, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of sodomy in the second degree, attempted sodomy in the second degree and three counts of sexual abuse in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent prison terms of 3 to 6 years on the sodomy charge and 1 year for each of the sexual abuse charges, with a consecutive prison term of 2 to 4 years on the attempted sodomy charge, unanimously affirmed.

The defendant was not denied a fair trial by the admission of hearsay testimony under the prompt outcry exception. The testimony was admitted for the limited purpose of establishing the complainant’s credibility, and the jury was properly instructed to consider that evidence for that limited purpose (People v Rice, 75 NY2d 929, 931-932). We also find that the defendant’s sentence was not excessive. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Wallach and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

192 A.D.2d 354, 596 N.Y.S.2d 34, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3514, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-nowlin-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack