Opinion
July 16, 1993
Appeal from the Cayuga County Court, Corning, J.
Present — Callahan, J.P., Green, Pine, Fallon and Davis, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court properly allowed defendant's estranged wife and his former wife to testify that defendant had bitten them on prior occasions when he was angry. Defendant's conduct was sufficiently unique to be considered by the jury on the issue of identity (see, People v Smith, 63 N.Y.2d 41, 64-65, cert denied 469 U.S. 1227; People v Allweiss, 48 N.Y.2d 40, 47-48; People v. Rossman, 95 A.D.2d 873).
We reject defendant's contention that his constitutional right to be present at trial (see, US Const 6th, 14th Amends; NY Const, art I, § 6) was violated when the material witness hearing (see, CPL 620.50) was conducted in his absence. The sole issue at the material witness hearing was whether a witness would "be amenable or responsive to a subpoena" directing her attendance at the Ventimiglia hearing (CPL 620.20 [b]). The hearing did not address evidentiary matters (cf., People v. Turaine, 78 N.Y.2d 871) or issues on which defendant had special knowledge (cf., People v. Dokes, 79 N.Y.2d 656) and his exclusion from the hearing did not affect his ability to defend (see, People v. Morales, 80 N.Y.2d 450, 457).
The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), is sufficient to support the conviction and the verdict is not contrary to the weight of the evidence (see, People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495).
We have examined defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be unpreserved or lacking in merit.