Opinion
April 28, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Mark, J.
Present — Green, J.P., Pine, Callahan, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted following a jury trial of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02). There is no merit to his contention that the trial court's admission of evidence of uncharged crimes deprived him of a fair trial. After conducting a Ventimiglia hearing (see, People v Ventimiglia, 52 N.Y.2d 350), the court ruled that the complainant could testify about each instance when she saw defendant with the gun and the time when he threatened to kill her with the gun; she could not testify about defendant's demands that she work as a prostitute nor other times that defendant assaulted her. The permitted testimony is relevant to the issue whether defendant's possession of the gun was temporary and innocent, as defendant maintained. The probative value of that evidence outweighs any prejudicial effect (see, People v Hudy, 73 N.Y.2d 40, 54-55; People v Alvino, 71 N.Y.2d 233, 242; People v Stimus, 136 A.D.2d 908, 909). Furthermore, any potential for prejudice was minimized by the court's limiting instructions with respect to that testimony (see, People v Ricchiuti, 93 A.D.2d 842, 845).