From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Cheek

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 23, 1990
163 A.D.2d 580 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

July 23, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Bambrick, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).

On appeal, the defendant contends, inter alia, that he was deprived of a fair trial when the court allowed the complainant to testify as to the substance of the complainant's report of the robbery to a police officer. The admission of evidence of this prior consistent statement impermissibly bolstered the complainant's earlier account of the events, since there had been no impeachment of the complainant with that statement and no charge had been made of a recent fabrication. A review of the trial minutes discloses, however, that any issue of law with respect to this specific claim of error is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05). In any event, although the admission of this testimony was error (see, People v Jimenez, 102 A.D.2d 439, 443), we find it harmless, in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt and our conclusion that there was no significant probability that the court would have acquitted the defendant if the testimony had been excluded (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).

We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; see also, People v. Glass, 43 N.Y.2d 283, 286). Thompson, J.P., Eiber, Rosenblatt and Miller, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Cheek

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 23, 1990
163 A.D.2d 580 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Cheek

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KEVIN CHEEK, Appellant

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

Date published: Jul 23, 1990

Citations

163 A.D.2d 580 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
559 N.Y.S.2d 674

Citing Cases

People v. Shannon

We agree with the defendant's contention that the Supreme Court should not have allowed a witness to testify…

People v. Rogers

Consequently, the prior consistent statement of the accomplice was not made prior to the alleged motive to…