Opinion
2015-02-6
Timothy P. Donaher, Public Defender, Rochester (Kimberly F. Duguay of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Daniel Gross of Counsel), for Respondent.
Timothy P. Donaher, Public Defender, Rochester (Kimberly F. Duguay of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Daniel Gross of Counsel), for Respondent.
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., FAHEY, PERADOTTO, CARNI, and WHALEN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM:
On appeal from a judgment convicting her, upon a jury verdict, of two counts of offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree (Penal Law § 175.35), defendant's sole contention is that Supreme Court erred in denying her motion for a mistrial on the ground that the testimony of a witness that a bracelet was missing from the witness's residence was Molineux evidence and was improperly admitted because she did not receive the requisite notice of the testimony. We conclude that defendant's contention is without merit because the testimony did not implicate defendant in the commission of any uncharged crime and thus it did not constitute Molineux evidence ( see People v. Hillard, 79 A.D.3d 1757, 1758, 917 N.Y.S.2d 778, lv. denied17 N.Y.3d 796, 929 N.Y.S.2d 104, 952 N.E.2d 1099; see generally People v. Arafet, 13 N.Y.3d 460, 464–465, 892 N.Y.S.2d 812, 920 N.E.2d 919).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.