People v. Knox
| Decision Date | 27 December 2018 |
| Docket Number | 108166 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. William M. KNOX, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
167 A.D.3d 1324
90 N.Y.S.3d 389
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
William M. KNOX, Appellant.
108166
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Calendar Date: November 19, 2018
Decided and Entered: December 27, 2018
Terrence M. Kelly, Albany, for appellant.
D. Holley Carnright, District Attorney, Kingston (Paul DerOhannesian of counsel), for respondent.
Before: McCarthy, J.P., Egan Jr., Lynch, Devine and Clark, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Clark, J.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Williams, J.), rendered November 6, 2015, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of criminal contempt in the second degree.
Defendant was indicted on charges of assault in the second degree, aggravated
criminal contempt (two counts) and criminal contempt in the first degree following allegations that, on two occasions in September 2014 and October 2014, he engaged in conduct that violated an order of protection that had been issued against him in favor of his ex-fiance´ (hereinafter the victim). After a trial, a jury acquitted defendant of the felony charged crimes, but found him guilty of the misdemeanor charge of criminal contempt in the second degree, which County Court had charged as a lesser included offense of aggravated criminal contempt under count 2 of the indictment.1 County Court thereafter sentenced defendant to one year in jail and issued a full stay-away order of protection in favor of the victim. Defendant appeals, and we affirm.
Initially, defendant argues that his conviction for criminal contempt in the second degree should be reversed because County Court improperly charged that crime as a lesser included offense of aggravated criminal contempt. However, defendant specifically requested that County Court charge criminal contempt in the second degree as a lesser included offense of aggravated criminal contempt and, with no objection from defendant, County Court so charged the jury. Under these circumstances, defendant waived any challenge that he may have had to such a lesser included offense charge, and he may not now be heard to complain (see People v. Mills, 1 N.Y.3d 269, 274, 772 N.Y.S.2d 228, 804 N.E.2d 392 [2003] ; People v. Richardson, 88 N.Y.2d 1049, 1051, 650 N.Y.S.2d 633, 673 N.E.2d 918 [1996] ; People v. Roman, 13 A.D.3d 1115, 1115, 787 N.Y.S.2d 568 [2004], lv denied 4 NY3d 802, 795 N.Y.S.2d 178, 828 N.E.2d 94 [2005] ).
Defendant further argues that County Court's Molineux ruling, which allowed the People to present evidence of certain prior acts of domestic violence that he had allegedly perpetrated against the victim, deprived him of a fair trial. Although evidence of prior uncharged crimes or bad acts may never be presented for the sole purpose of establishing a defendant's criminal propensity or bad character, such evidence may be
admissible if it is probative of some other material issue or fact in the case and its probative value outweighs any undue prejudice (see People v. Leonard, 29 N.Y.3d 1, 7–8, 51 N.Y.S.3d 4, 73 N.E.3d 344 [2017] ; People v. Blair, 90 N.Y.2d 1003, 1004–1005, 665 N.Y.S.2d 629, 688 N.E.2d 503 [1997] ; People v. Alvino, 71 N.Y.2d 233,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Rosa
...N.Y.S.2d 253, 17 N.E.3d 508 [2014] ). Were we to consider this issue, we would find it to be without merit (see People v. Knox, 167 A.D.3d 1324, 1326, 90 N.Y.S.3d 389 [2018], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 950, 100 N.Y.S.3d 166, 123 N.E.3d 825 [2019] ; compare People v. Leonard, 29 N.Y.3d 1, 7–8, 51 N......
-
People v. LaDuke
...of some other material issue or fact in the case and its probative value outweighs any undue prejudice" ( People v. Knox, 167 A.D.3d 1324, 1325–1326, 90 N.Y.S.3d 389 [2018] [citations omitted], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 950, 100 N.Y.S.3d 166, 123 N.E.3d 825 [2019] ; see People v. Young, 190 A.D.3......
-
People v. Flower
...material issues of fact and its probative value outweighed any undue prejudice (see People v. Knox , 167 A.D.3d 1324, 1326, 90 N.Y.S.3d 389 [2018], 33 N.Y.3d 950, 100 N.Y.S.3d 166, 123 N.E.3d 825 [2019] ), and any error by County Court in failing to provide limiting instructions where neces......
-
People v. Gannon
...of some other material issue or fact in the case and its probative value outweighs any undue prejudice" ( People v. Knox, 167 A.D.3d 1324, 1325, 90 N.Y.S.3d 389 [2018] [citations omitted], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 950, 100 N.Y.S.3d 166, 123 N.E.3d 825 [2019] ; see People v. Frumusa, 29 N.Y.3d 36......
-
Relevance & materiality
...evidence related to the defendant’s uncharged crime because the surveillance was probative of the defendant’s intent. People v. Knox , 167 A.D.3d 1324, 90 N.Y.S.3d 389 (3d Dept. 2019). he trial court properly permitted the prosecution to present evidence of prior acts of domestic violence a......
-
Relevance, materiality & presumptions
...evidence related to the defendant’s uncharged crime because the surveillance was probative of the defendant’s intent. People v. Knox , 167 A.D.3d 1324, 90 N.Y.S.3d 389 (3d Dept. 2019). he trial court properly permitted the prosecution to present evidence of prior acts of domestic violence a......
-
Relevance, materiality & presumptions
...evidence related to the defendant’s uncharged crime because the surveillance was probative of the defendant’s intent. People v. Knox , 167 A.D.3d 1324, 90 N.Y.S.3d 389 (3d Dept. 2018). The trial court properly permitted the prosecution to present evidence of prior acts of domestic violence ......