People v. Rios

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rios

248 A.D.2d 734, 670 N.Y.S.2d 338, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3461

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

DecidedMarch 30, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 248 A.D.2d 734 (People v. Rios) 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. Rios, 248 A.D.2d 734, 670 N.Y.S.2d 338, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3461 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flaherty, J.), rendered October 25, 1995, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s claim that the court improperly admitted evidence of uncharged bad acts is without merit. Since the [735]*735defendant’s statement to the robbery victim during the course of the crime was inextricably interwoven with the acts constituting that crime, the admission of the evidence was proper (see, People v Ventigmilia, 52 NY2d 350; People v Vails, 43 NY2d 364; People v Chu-Joi, 239 AD2d 596). The defendant’s contention with respect to the court’s charge regarding the limited use of the above evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245).

Joy, J. P., Krausman, Florio and Luciano, 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, Queens County (Flaherty, J.), rendered October 25, 1995, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s claim that the court improperly admitted evidence of uncharged bad acts is without merit. Since the [735]*735defendant’s statement to the robbery victim during the course of the crime was inextricably interwoven with the acts constituting that crime, the admission of the evidence was proper (see, People v Ventigmilia, 52 NY2d 350; People v Vails, 43 NY2d 364; People v Chu-Joi, 239 AD2d 596). The defendant’s contention with respect to the court’s charge regarding the limited use of the above evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245).

Joy, J. P., Krausman, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 A.D.2d 734, 670 N.Y.S.2d 338, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3461, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rios-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack