People v. Pinero

• Decision Date: 30 March 2000
• Citation: People v. Pinero, 270 A.D.2d 212, 706 N.Y.S.2d 28 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
• Parties: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent,<BR>v.<BR>WILLIAM PINERO, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

270 A.D.2d 212

706 N.Y.S.2d 28

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent,

v.WILLIAM PINERO, Appellant.

Decided March 30, 2000.

Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Andrias, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

The court properly exercised its discretion in receiving evidence of uncharged crimes, not all of which directly involved defendant himself, as evidence of motive and as background, completing the narrative of events.The challenged evidence, taken as a whole and in connection with the other evidence adduced at trial, provided strong circumstantial proof that defendant and his companion, acting as agents of a criminal conspiracy, killed the deceased, a vendor of Christmas trees, because he stopped paying protection money (see, People v Ponnapula,266 AD2d 32).The nexus between defendant, the various events, and the instant crime was clearly established.

Any error in the court's refusal to permit defendant to display his facial scar to the jury did not result in prejudice to him in view of the minimal probative value of the scar and the fact...