People v. Severino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Severino

309 A.D.2d 571, 765 N.Y.S.2d 502, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10493

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

DecidedOctober 9, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 309 A.D.2d 571 (People v. Severino) 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. Severino, 309 A.D.2d 571, 765 N.Y.S.2d 502, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10493 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Leslie Crocker Snyder, J.), rendered December 19, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted murder in the second degree and assault in the first degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 12V2 to 25 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly admitted a detective’s testimony concerning his investigative steps, including preparation of a wanted card, since this testimony provided a narrative of events leading to defendant’s arrest (see e.g. People v Parris, 247 AD2d 221, 222 [1998], lv denied 91 NY2d 944 [1998]), and did not imply that a nontestifying witness had implicated defendant. In any event, were we to find any error in the receipt of this testimony, we would find it to be harmless. Defendant’s [572]*572Confrontation Clause claim is unpreserved and unavailing (see People v Jenkins, 302 AD2d 247, 249 [2003]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Defendant’s remaining contentions, including those relating to the criteria employed by the court in imposing sentence (see People v Harrison, 82 NY2d 693 [1993]), are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them. Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Sullivan, Ellerin and Friedman, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Leslie Crocker Snyder, J.), rendered December 19, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted murder in the second degree and assault in the first degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 12V2 to 25 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly admitted a detective’s testimony concerning his investigative steps, including preparation of a wanted card, since this testimony provided a narrative of events leading to defendant’s arrest (see e.g. People v Parris, 247 AD2d 221, 222 [1998], lv denied 91 NY2d 944 [1998]), and did not imply that a nontestifying witness had implicated defendant. In any event, were we to find any error in the receipt of this testimony, we would find it to be harmless. Defendant’s [572]*572Confrontation Clause claim is unpreserved and unavailing (see People v Jenkins, 302 AD2d 247, 249 [2003]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Defendant’s remaining contentions, including those relating to the criteria employed by the court in imposing sentence (see People v Harrison, 82 NY2d 693 [1993]), are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them. Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Sullivan, Ellerin and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

309 A.D.2d 571, 765 N.Y.S.2d 502, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10493, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-severino-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack