People v. Sturdivant

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sturdivant

269 A.D.2d 549, 703 N.Y.S.2d 726, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1908

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

DecidedFebruary 22, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 269 A.D.2d 549 (People v. Sturdivant) 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. Sturdivant, 269 A.D.2d 549, 703 N.Y.S.2d 726, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1908 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Martin, J.), rendered February 18, 1997, convicting him of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Under the circumstances of this case, the admission into evidence of the uncharged crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance was relevant to the defendant’s motive, and the probative value of this evidence outweighed its potential for prejudice (see, People v Maher, 224 AD2d 549, affd 89 NY2d 456; People v Burton, 224 AD2d 438, 439; People v Hamid, 209 AD2d 716; People v McDowell, 191 AD2d 515). Further, the testimony that the defendant was a drug dealer was relevant to establish the relationship between the complainant, the eyewitness, and the defendant (see, People v Artis, 220 AD2d 441).

[550]*550The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]), or without merit. Ritter, J. P., Altman, Luciano and Feuerstein, 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, Kings County (Martin, J.), rendered February 18, 1997, convicting him of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Under the circumstances of this case, the admission into evidence of the uncharged crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance was relevant to the defendant’s motive, and the probative value of this evidence outweighed its potential for prejudice (see, People v Maher, 224 AD2d 549, affd 89 NY2d 456; People v Burton, 224 AD2d 438, 439; People v Hamid, 209 AD2d 716; People v McDowell, 191 AD2d 515). Further, the testimony that the defendant was a drug dealer was relevant to establish the relationship between the complainant, the eyewitness, and the defendant (see, People v Artis, 220 AD2d 441).

[550]*550The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]), or without merit. Ritter, J. P., Altman, Luciano and Feuerstein, JJ., concur..

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D.2d 549, 703 N.Y.S.2d 726, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1908, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sturdivant-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack