From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Mosley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 17, 2001
282 A.D.2d 314 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

April 17, 2001.

Judgments, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Phylis Skloot Bamberger, J.), rendered April 3, 1998 and February 26, 1998, respectively, convicting defendant Mosley, after a jury trial, of murder in the second degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and sentencing him to two consecutive terms of 25 years to life concurrent with a term of 5 to 15 years, and convicting defendant Matthews, after the same jury trial, of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 25 years to life and 7½ to 15 years, unanimously affirmed.

Lynetta M. St. Clair, for Respondent.

Lynetta M. St. Clair, for Respondent.

Jan Hoth-Uzzo, for Defendant-Appellant.

Joseph M. Nursey, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Saxe, Friedman, JJ.


Considering the form of the jury's questions, the issues raised at trial and the lack of prejudice to defendants, the court properly exercised its discretion in rereading the acting in concert charge in response to notes from the deliberating jury (see, People v. Mercado, 91 N.Y.2d 960; People v. Almodovar, 62 N.Y.2d 126, 131-132; People v. Vallo, 161 A.D.2d 327, lv denied 7 6 N.Y.2d 991). While the notes focused on the elements of the crimes, they indicated that the jury was having difficulty with accessorial liability, and since two days had passed from the time the jury had initially been instructed on this concept, it was proper to reinstruct them. Defendants' claim that the court's repetition of its acting in concert charge conveyed to the jury an opinion as to defendants' guilt is completely speculative.

Since defendant Mosley did not dispute the People's contention that he had relationships with the People's witnesses, his request for a hearing pursuant to People v. Rodriguez ( 79 N.Y.2d 445) was properly denied (People v. Murray, 247 A.D.2d 292, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 857;People v. DeJesus, 244 A.D.2d 244, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 925; People v. Estrada, 241 A.D.2d 378, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 925).

Contrary to defendant Matthews's contention, his conviction was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury's determinations concerning credibility, and the circumstantial evidence warranted the conclusion that Matthews acted in concert with others in the murder for which he was convicted.

The court properly exercised its discretion in admitting a witness's photographic identification of a nondefendant whose identity was relevant to issues raised at trial, as well as testimony that a weapon linked to Matthews was the same or similar to a weapon used in the crime. The alleged defects in these items of testimony primarily involved matters of credibility to be resolved by the jury, and went to the weight rather than the admissibility of the evidence (see, People v. Mirenda, 23 N.Y.2d 439, 453-454; People v. Sosa, 255 A.D.2d 236, lv denied 93 N.Y.2d 979).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Mosley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 17, 2001
282 A.D.2d 314 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

People v. Mosley

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent v. CURTIS MOSLEY…

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

Date published: Apr 17, 2001

Citations

282 A.D.2d 314 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
723 N.Y.S.2d 457

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

We reject the contention of defendant that the court erred in denying his request for a Rodriguez hearing (…

People v. Matthews

All of defendant's remaining claims, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief, are…