People v. Tomlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Tomlin

295 A.D.2d 458, 743 N.Y.S.2d 310, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5935

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

DecidedJune 10, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 295 A.D.2d 458 (People v. Tomlin) 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. Tomlin, 295 A.D.2d 458, 743 N.Y.S.2d 310, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5935 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gary, J.), rendered March 9, 2000, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is, affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the testimony adduced by the People established his involvement in the uncharged crime of selling marijuana. This testimony was properly admitted as it was highly probative of the defendant’s motive for committing the murder (see People v Porter, 256 AD2d 363, 364; People v Collins, 220 AD2d 610, 611; People v Moore, 213 AD2d 496). Accordingly, the trial court properly denied the defendant’s request for a mistrial or to strike the testimony. Santucci, J.P., Altman, Goldstein 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, Kings County (Gary, J.), rendered March 9, 2000, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is, affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the testimony adduced by the People established his involvement in the uncharged crime of selling marijuana. This testimony was properly admitted as it was highly probative of the defendant’s motive for committing the murder (see People v Porter, 256 AD2d 363, 364; People v Collins, 220 AD2d 610, 611; People v Moore, 213 AD2d 496). Accordingly, the trial court properly denied the defendant’s request for a mistrial or to strike the testimony. Santucci, J.P., Altman, Goldstein and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

295 A.D.2d 458, 743 N.Y.S.2d 310, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5935, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tomlin-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack