People v. Ramirez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ramirez

200 A.D.2d 377, 606 N.Y.S.2d 194, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 89

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

DecidedJanuary 6, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 200 A.D.2d 377 (People v. Ramirez) 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. Ramirez, 200 A.D.2d 377, 606 N.Y.S.2d 194, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 89 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Frank Diaz, J.), rendered October 18, 1991, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of rape in the first degree (two counts), incest, and endangering the welfare of a child, and sentencing him to concurrent prison terms of 3 to 9 years (twice), 1 to 3 years, and 1 year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s challenge to the trial court’s curative instructions directing the jury to disregard all testimony of acts of sexual abuse occurring "outside the court’s jurisdiction” is unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law, defendant having failed to request further curative instructions (CPL 470.05 [2]; see, People v Russell, 179 AD2d 521, 522), and we decline to review in the interest of justice. Were we to review, we would find that the court’s instructions, which the jury is presumed to have followed, were adequate (supra; see also, People v Rodriguez, 103 AD2d 121, 129). Defendant’s other points are without merit. It was not an abuse of discretion to permit an expert witness, who otherwise would have been unavailable, to testify out of turn (see, People v Olsen, 34 NY2d 349, 353). The court’s Sandoval ruling was clearly proper, since it permitted the People to elicit only the fact of a prior conviction that was then still pending on appeal, and not any of the circumstances underlying it (compare, People v Chambers, 184 AD2d 716, 717-718). The victim’s testimony was clear and unequivocal, and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Frank Diaz, J.), rendered October 18, 1991, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of rape in the first degree (two counts), incest, and endangering the welfare of a child, and sentencing him to concurrent prison terms of 3 to 9 years (twice), 1 to 3 years, and 1 year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s challenge to the trial court’s curative instructions directing the jury to disregard all testimony of acts of sexual abuse occurring "outside the court’s jurisdiction” is unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law, defendant having failed to request further curative instructions (CPL 470.05 [2]; see, People v Russell, 179 AD2d 521, 522), and we decline to review in the interest of justice. Were we to review, we would find that the court’s instructions, which the jury is presumed to have followed, were adequate (supra; see also, People v Rodriguez, 103 AD2d 121, 129). Defendant’s other points are without merit. It was not an abuse of discretion to permit an expert witness, who otherwise would have been unavailable, to testify out of turn (see, People v Olsen, 34 NY2d 349, 353). The court’s Sandoval ruling was clearly proper, since it permitted the People to elicit only the fact of a prior conviction that was then still pending on appeal, and not any of the circumstances underlying it (compare, People v Chambers, 184 AD2d 716, 717-718). The victim’s testimony was clear and unequivocal, and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

200 A.D.2d 377, 606 N.Y.S.2d 194, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 89, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ramirez-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack