Summary
holding that evidence of the defendant's prior assault on the victim was properly admitted at his murder trial, because “evidence that he previously assaulted the victim was admissible to establish his motive and intent”
Summary of this case from Baker v. KirkpatrickOpinion
Submitted May 14, 2001
June 11, 2001
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenberg, J.), rendered January 5, 1998, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Daniel L. Greenberg, New York, N.Y. (Jeffrey I. Richman of counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Cynthia Kean of counsel), for respondent.
Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The Supreme Court properly permitted the People to introduce evidence relating to the defendant's prior assault against the victim. It is well settled that "where the evidence of prior, uncharged criminal conduct has a bearing upon a material aspect of the People's case other than the accused's general propensity toward criminality * * * the probative value of the evidence justifies its admission, notwithstanding the potential for incidental prejudice" (People v. Santarelli, 49 N.Y.2d 241, 247; see also, People v. Alvino, 71 N.Y.2d 233). Despite the defendant's contention, evidence that he previously assaulted the victim was admissible to establish his motive and intent (see, People v. Molineux, 168 N.Y. 264; People v. Hamid, 209 A.D.2d 716; People v. Montana, 192 A.D.2d 623; People v. Vita, 184 A.D.2d 742; People v. Carver, 183 A.D.2d 907).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.