From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Utenyshev

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 2, 1999
264 A.D.2d 402 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

August 2, 1999.

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Leventhal, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by reducing the sentence imposed on the convictions of unlawful imprisonment in the first degree and attempted sexual abuse in the first degree from indeterminate terms of 1 1/2 to 4 1/2 years imprisonment to indeterminate terms of 1 1/3 to 4 years imprisonment; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review the issue of whether the trial court improperly admitted into evidence a videotape, made in violation of his right to counsel, for the purpose of rebutting the defendant's insanity defense ( see, CPL 470.05; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). In any event, had the issue been preserved, we would have concluded that although it had been improper for the trial court to admit such evidence ( see, People v. Ricco, 56 N.Y.2d 320; People v. MacKenzie, 193 A.D.2d 700), this error would not warrant reversal. The quantity and quality of the evidence is such that there is no reasonable possibility that the verdict was affected by the admission of the videotape ( see, People v. Rivera, 57 N.Y.2d 453; People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230; People v. MacKenzie, supra).

The sentence imposed for unlawful imprisonment in the first degree and attempted sexual abuse in the first degree was illegal ( see, Penal Law § 70.00 [e], [3] [b]). It is clear, however, that the Supreme Court intended to impose upon the defendant the maximum sentence for those offenses, and we find that it would be appropriate to do so. Consequently, the judgment is modified to reflect the intention of the Supreme Court ( see, People v. Dorch, 117 A.D.2d 677; People v. Gammon, 251 A.D.2d 512). The sentence is not excessive ( see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

S. Miller, J. P., Ritter, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Utenyshev

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 2, 1999
264 A.D.2d 402 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

People v. Utenyshev

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANATOLEIV UTENYSHEV…

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

Date published: Aug 2, 1999

Citations

264 A.D.2d 402 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
695 N.Y.S.2d 104

Citing Cases

Stewart v. Artuz

No such showing has been made. He has not demonstrated that even if the admission into evidence of the audio…

People v. Wilhelm

The other factor cited was defendant's admission during the expert's interview of her that she told Luke…