People v. Tosca

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Tosca

773 N.E.2d 1014, 98 N.Y.2d 660, 746 N.Y.S.2d 276, 2002 N.Y. LEXIS 1517

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 6, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by164 cases

This text of 773 N.E.2d 1014 (People v. Tosca) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Tosca, 773 N.E.2d 1014, 98 N.Y.2d 660, 746 N.Y.S.2d 276, 2002 N.Y. LEXIS 1517 (N.Y. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the police officers’ testimony concerning an unidentified cab driver’s report of a recent encounter with the armed defendant. The testimony was admitted not for its truth, but to provide background information as to how and why the police pursued and confronted defendant (see People v Till, 87 NY2d 835, 837). Further, the trial court twice explicitly instructed the jury on the limited use it could make of the testimony and that the testimony was not to be considered proof of the uncharged crime.

Finally, defendant was not unduly prejudiced by the prosecution’s questionable remarks during summation, given the trial court’s prompt curative instructions (cf. People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105, 111).

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley, Rosenblatt and Graffeo concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the police officers’ testimony concerning an unidentified cab driver’s report of a recent encounter with the armed defendant. The testimony was admitted not for its truth, but to provide background information as to how and why the police pursued and confronted defendant (see People v Till, 87 NY2d 835, 837). Further, the trial court twice explicitly instructed the jury on the limited use it could make of the testimony and that the testimony was not to be considered proof of the uncharged crime.

Finally, defendant was not unduly prejudiced by the prosecution’s questionable remarks during summation, given the trial court’s prompt curative instructions (cf. People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105, 111).

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley, Rosenblatt and Graffeo concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

773 N.E.2d 1014, 98 N.Y.2d 660, 746 N.Y.S.2d 276, 2002 N.Y. LEXIS 1517, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tosca-ny-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack