From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. James E. M

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 31, 1997
245 A.D.2d 1110 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

December 31, 1997

Present — Denman, P.J., Green, Callahan, Balio and Fallon, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted following a jury trial of sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.65) and endangering the welfare of a child (Penal Law § 260.10) in connection with the sexual assault of his 15-year-old stepdaughter. According to the testimony at trial, defendant entered the bedroom of the victim at approximately 3:00 or 4:00 A.M. on February 2, 1995 and molested her. Defendant was arrested later that day. We reject the contention of defendant that he was denied his right to a speedy trial. The People validly declared their readiness for trial pursuant to CPL 30.30 on July 24, 1995, and thus it was possible for defendant to be arraigned and the trial to proceed within the six-month statutory period ( see, People v. Goss, 87 N.Y.2d 792, 794; People v. Kitchen, 234 A.D.2d 964, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 1095).

Defendant also contends that County Court's Sandoval ruling, permitting defendant to be cross-examined regarding threats he allegedly made to his wife, stepson, and another witness, was an abuse of discretion. Evidence of those threats would have been admissible in the People's direct case on the issue of consciousness of guilt ( see, People v. Pugh, 236 A.D.2d 810, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 1099), and we conclude that the court's decision was not an abuse of discretion.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People ( see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621), we conclude that it is legally sufficient to establish defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt ( see, People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495). The verdict is not against the weight of the evidence ( see, People v. Bleakley, supra, at 495).

Finally, upon our review of the record, we conclude that defendant received meaningful representation ( see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147; People v. Trait, 139 A.D.2d 937, 938, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 867). (Appeal from Judgment of Oswego County Court, Brandt, J. — Sexual Abuse, 1st Degree.)


Summaries of

People v. James E. M

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 31, 1997
245 A.D.2d 1110 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. James E. M

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES E. M., Appellant

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

Date published: Dec 31, 1997

Citations

245 A.D.2d 1110 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
666 N.Y.S.2d 94