People v. Lovacco

• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Writing for the Court: Before ELLERIN
• Citation: People v. Lovacco, 650 N.Y.S.2d 672, 234 A.D.2d 55 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
• Decision Date: 05 December 1996
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Salvatore LOVACCO, Defendant-Appellant.

Page 672

650 N.Y.S.2d 672

234 A.D.2d 55

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Salvatore LOVACCO, Defendant-Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division First Department.

Dec. 5, 1996.

Ellen Sue Handman for Respondent.

Arthur H. Hopkirk, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before ELLERIN, J.P., and WALLACH, KUPFERMAN and TOM, JJ.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Budd Goodman, J.), rendered January 15, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of murder in the second degree and robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 21 years to life, and 5 to 15 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The People's evidence, detailing defendant's role in removing property from the victim while he was being held at gunpoint by an accomplice, and the victim's subsequent death by shooting, clearly establish defendant's guilt of robbery and felony murder. The non-accomplice testimony demonstrating defendant's presence with his accomplices in the back portion of the jewelry store, and his conduct in sending away a potential customer while the victim, who was the owner of the store, was crouched nearby, tended to connect defendant to the commission of the crimes (see, CPL 60.22; People v. Hudson, 51 N.Y.2d 233, 240, 433 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 414 N.E.2d 385). Based upon our independent review of the facts, we also find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672).

We reject defendant's arguments concerning evidence of uncharged crimes. Under the unique circumstances of this case, it was not error to admit evidence concerning a bank robbery in Rochester. This evidence was highly relevant to the credibility of the accomplice witness (see, People v. Bernard, 224 A.D.2d 192, 637 N.Y.S.2d 692, lv. denied 88 N.Y.2d 964, 647 N.Y.S.2d 718, 670 N.E.2d 1350; People v. Steinberg, 170 A.D.2d 50, 73, 573 N.Y.S.2d 965, affd. 79 N.Y.2d 673, 584 N.Y.S.2d 770, 595 N.E.2d 845), in connection with the burglary charge of which defendant was not convicted (see, People v. LeGrand, 76 A.D.2d 706, 431 N.Y.S.2d 850; People v. Civitello, 152 A.D.2d 812, 543 N.Y.S.2d 1003, lv. denied 74 N.Y.2d 947, 550 N.Y.S.2d 282, 549 N.E.2d 484). Thus, the prejudice, if any, would appear minimal. Defendant's arguments concerning other alleged uncharged crimes evidence are largely unpreserved, since defendant either failed to object (see, People v. Hicks, 226 A.D.2d 189, 641 N.Y.S.2d 10, lv. denied 88 N.Y.2d 966, 647 N.Y.S.2d 720, 670 N.E.2d 1352) or objected on different grounds (see, People v. Vargas, 168 A.D.2d 317, 562 N.Y.S.2d 650, lv. denied 77 N.Y.2d 968, 570 N.Y.S.2d 501, 573 N.E.2d 589), and are, in any event, without merit. The only preserved claim, regarding testimony that a gun was observed in defendant's bedroom, is without merit since...