Opinion
December 20, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Jerome Hornblass, J.).
A review of the lineup photograph supports the trial court's ruling that the lineup was not unnecessarily suggestive or conducive to erroneous identification (People v Howard, 130 A.D.2d 384, 385).
The People presented overwhelming evidence of defendant's guilt of the crimes charged. The background of the People's witnesses was fully presented to the jury for its consideration and its determinations of fact and credibility, supported by the record, will not be disturbed by this Court (People v Siu Wah Tse, 91 A.D.2d 350).
The record indicates that the People's witnesses volunteered testimony (unobjected to by defense counsel) regarding incidental contents of the bag used by defendant to collect the stolen cash, as well as defendant's attempt to steal a ring from one of the store's occupants that was aborted when his accomplice urged defendant to flee. To the extent that this testimony constituted evidence of uncharged crimes, it was admissible as inextricably interwoven with the crimes charged and its probative value outweighed any possible prejudice (People v Vails, 43 N.Y.2d 364, 368-369).
The trial court also properly admitted evidence of defendant's failure to appear as scheduled in this case and his subsequent involuntary return 11 months later. As to the trial court's instruction regarding evaluation of evidence of flight as consciousness of guilt, the jury properly considered this evidence as probative of the issues before it (see, People v Yazum, 13 N.Y.2d 302).
We perceive no abuse of discretion in sentencing.
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Ross, Rubin, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.