AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ERIC ROMAN, Appellant.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05) and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (former § 265.03). Contrary to the contention of defendant, County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying his motion for a mistrial based on the hearsay testimony of the victim that defendant wanted to shoot and kill him ( see People v. Horn, 284 AD2d 986, lv denied 97 NY2d 683; see generally People v. Abston, 229 AD2d 970, 971, lv denied 88 NY2d 1066). The court's prompt curative instruction minimized any prejudice caused by the improper testimony ( see Horn, 284 AD2d 986; see generally People v. Shorter, 6 AD3d 1204, lv denied 3 NY3d 648; Abston, 229 AD2d at 971). Also contrary to defendant's contention, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence ( see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Three witnesses, including the victim, identified defendant as the shooter. "Great deference is to be accorded to the [jury's] resolution of credibility issues based upon its superior vantage point and its opportunity to view witnesses, observe demeanor and hear the testimony" ( People v. Valencia, 263 AD2d 874, 876, lv denied 94 NY2d 799).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. ROMAN
(Apr 29, 2005)