People v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Smith

211 A.D.2d 650, 621 N.Y.S.2d 99

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

DecidedJanuary 9, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 211 A.D.2d 650 (People v. Smith) 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. Smith, 211 A.D.2d 650, 621 N.Y.S.2d 99 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Bangs County (Koch, J.), rendered March 3, 1993, convicting him of assault in the second degree and resisting arrest, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, the admission of testimony concerning his post-arrest threats to the arresting police officers does not constitute error as a matter of law (see, People v Brown, 83 NY2d 791). Under the circumstances of this case, the trial court properly admitted the evidence complained of to show the defendant’s intent in committing the underlying assaultive acts, as well as his consciousness of guilt (see, People v Leitzsey, 173 AD2d 488; People v Liberatore, 167 AD2d 425; People v Whaley, 144 AD2d 510; People v Jones, 124 AD2d 749; People v Barksdale, 100 AD2d 852).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Thompson, Copertino and Pizzuto, 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, Bangs County (Koch, J.), rendered March 3, 1993, convicting him of assault in the second degree and resisting arrest, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, the admission of testimony concerning his post-arrest threats to the arresting police officers does not constitute error as a matter of law (see, People v Brown, 83 NY2d 791). Under the circumstances of this case, the trial court properly admitted the evidence complained of to show the defendant’s intent in committing the underlying assaultive acts, as well as his consciousness of guilt (see, People v Leitzsey, 173 AD2d 488; People v Liberatore, 167 AD2d 425; People v Whaley, 144 AD2d 510; People v Jones, 124 AD2d 749; People v Barksdale, 100 AD2d 852).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Thompson, Copertino and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

211 A.D.2d 650, 621 N.Y.S.2d 99, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-smith-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack