From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rowe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 6, 2000
278 A.D.2d 256 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Argued November 6, 2000.

December 6, 2000.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Kowtna, J.), rendered March 10, 1997, convicting him of arson in the second degree and endangering the welfare of a child, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Matthew Muraskin, Hempstead, N.Y. (Kristen Reany on the brief), for appellant.

Denis Dillon, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Bruce E. Whitney and Douglas Noll of counsel), for respondent.

Before: GUY JAMES MANGANO, P.J., DANIEL F. LUCIANO, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, evidence of an uncharged crime was properly admitted as part of the res gestae, as it was so inextricably interwoven with the admissible evidence that it was necessary to an understanding of other parts of the testimony (see, People v. Sceravino, 193 A.D.2d 824; see also, People v. Ventimiglia, 52 N.Y.2d 350, 359).

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt of arson in the second degree (see, Penal Law § 150.15; People v. Fisher, 112 A.D.2d 1008).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Rowe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 6, 2000
278 A.D.2d 256 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

People v. Rowe

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., RESPONDENT, v. LANCE ROWE, APPELLANT. (IND. NO. 95497)

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

Date published: Dec 6, 2000

Citations

278 A.D.2d 256 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
716 N.Y.S.2d 914

Citing Cases

People v. Bermejo

The defendant's contention that the People exceeded the scope of the Supreme Court's Molineux ruling is…