In this circumstantial evidence case, the court properly exercised its discretion in admitting, on the issues of identity and motive, evidence of defendant's prior stabbings of his ex-girlfriends under circumstances that were similar to those of the instant crime and that made it probable that defendant committed all three crimes (see,People v. Beam, 57 N.Y.2d 241; People v. Willsey, 148 A.D.2d 764, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 749). Any prejudicial effect was minimized by the court's repeated limiting instructions, which the jury is presumed to have followed.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.