Summary
In People v Ortiz (134 A.D.2d 624), evidence of a dispute which occurred shortly before the murder alleged in the indictment provided important information on the sequence of events which ended in the shooting.
Summary of this case from People v. FabianOpinion
November 30, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hellenbrand, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the trial court did not err in permitting the introduction of testimony concerning the defendant's involvement in an altercation which had occurred shortly before the fatal shooting which gave rise to the charges contained in the indictment. We find, as did the trial court, that the challenged testimony was relevant to the extent that it provided necessary background information (see, People v Montanez, 41 N.Y.2d 53, 58), and that this testimony was also probative in apprising the jury of the sequence of events which culminated in the fatal shooting (see, People v. Ventimiglia, 52 N.Y.2d 350, 359; People v. Vails, 43 N.Y.2d 364, 368-369). Moreover, the trial court promptly instructed the jury that the testimony in question was not to be considered in determining whether the defendant was guilty of the crimes charged but was being admitted for the limited purpose of establishing the sequence of events. Thus, reversal on this ground is not warranted.
Furthermore, although we find that the photographic identification of the defendant by three witnesses may well have been tainted, the suppression of their identification testimony was not warranted since the record fully supports the hearing court's determination that each witness had an adequate independent recollection of the defendant upon which to base an in-court identification (see, People v. Ballott, 20 N.Y.2d 600; People v. Spano, 118 A.D.2d 884).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Brown, J.P., Lawrence, Weinstein and Eiber, JJ., concur.