From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Cody

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 24, 1989
149 A.D.2d 722 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

April 24, 1989

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Egitto, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that he was denied a fair trial by the admission of testimony relating to his prior bad acts and uncharged crimes (see, People v. Molineux, 168 N.Y. 264, 293). We disagree. Initially we note that many of the defendant's claims in this regard have not been preserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05; People v. Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951). In any event, in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt in this case, including the testimony of three eyewitnesses to the crime, one of whom was the defendant's own son, any error in admitting the testimony of which the defendant complains was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v. Cook, 42 N.Y.2d 204, 209; People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 240; cf., People v McKinney, 24 N.Y.2d 180; People v. Bolling, 120 A.D.2d 601, 602).

We find no basis for modifying the sentence imposed by the trial court (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Thompson, J.P., Bracken, Brown and Harwood, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Cody

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 24, 1989
149 A.D.2d 722 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

People v. Cody

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MARK A. CODY, SR.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Apr 24, 1989

Citations

149 A.D.2d 722 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
540 N.Y.S.2d 512

Citing Cases

People v. Williams

The defendant now claims that the admission of the uncharged transaction with the bicyclist constituted…

People v. Jones

The defendant claims that the People went beyond the Ventimiglia ruling by introducing testimony concerning…