People v. Rivers
| Decision Date | 25 March 2011 |
| Citation | 82 A.D.3d 1623,918 N.Y.S.2d 921 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Natalie D. RIVERS, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Alex R. Renzi, J.), rendered March 14, 2007. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of course of sexual conduct against a child in the second degree, sexual abuse in the second degree, criminal sexual act in the second degree and endangering the welfare of a child.
Timothy P. Donaher, Public Defender, Rochester (Janet C. Somes of Counsel), For defendant-appellant.
Michael C. Green, District Attorney, Rochester (Joseph D. Waldorf of Counsel), for respondent.
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her upon a jury verdict of, inter alia, course of sexual conduct against a child in the second degree (Penal Law § 130.80[1][b] ) and sexual abuse in the second degree (§ 130.60 [2] ). We reject defendant's contention that County Court erred in admitting evidence of uncharged acts of physical abuse to which the victim was subjected, as well as acts witnessed by her. Such evidence is admissible " 'to explain the victim's failure to reveal the ongoing sexual assaults' " ( People v. Bennett, 52 A.D.3d 1185, 1187, 859 N.Y.S.2d 836, lv. denied 11 N.Y.3d 734, 864 N.Y.S.2d 393, 894 N.E.2d 657; see People v. Bassett, 55 A.D.3d 1434, 1436, 866 N.Y.S.2d 473, lv. denied 11 N.Y.3d 922, 874 N.Y.S.2d 7, 902 N.E.2d 441). Contrary to defendant's contention, the court properly weighed the probative value of the evidence of those uncharged acts against its potential for prejudice, as demonstrated by the fact that the court admitted evidence of certain acts while precluding evidence of other acts ( see generally People v. Alvino, 71 N.Y.2d 233, 241-242, 525 N.Y.S.2d 7, 519 N.E.2d 808; People v. Ventimiglia, 52 N.Y.2d 350, 359-360, 438 N.Y.S.2d 261, 420 N.E.2d 59). In any event, we note that the court provided the jury with explicit limiting instructions on multiple occasions concerning the evidence of those uncharged acts, "thus minimizing any potential prejudice to defendant" ( Bassett, 55 A.D.3d at 1436, 866 N.Y.S.2d 473).
Defendant further contends that she was deprived of a fair trial based on numerous instances of prosecutorial misconduct on summation. Defendant failed to preserve her contention for our review with respect to the majority of the alleged instances of prosecutorial misconduct ( see People v. Figgins, 72 A.D.3d 1599, 1600, 899 N.Y.S.2d 702, lv. denied 15 N.Y.3d 893, 912 N.Y.S.2d 581, 938 N.E.2d 1016; People v. Brink, 57 A.D.3d 1484, 1486, 870 N.Y.S.2d 186, lv. denied 12...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Nicholson
... ... Westbrooks, 90 A.D.3d 1536, 1537, 935 N.Y.S.2d 241,lv. denied18 N.Y.3d 963, 944 N.Y.S.2d 492, 967 N.E.2d 717;People v. Bennett, 52 A.D.3d 1185, 1187, 859 N.Y.S.2d 836,lv. denied11 N.Y.3d 734, 864 N.Y.S.2d 393, 894 N.E.2d 657;see also People v. Rivers, 82 A.D.3d 1623, 1623, 918 N.Y.S.2d 921,lv. denied17 N.Y.3d 904, 933 N.Y.S.2d 659, 957 N.E.2d 1163). We further conclude that the record establishes that the court balanced the probative value of such evidence against its potential for prejudice ( see People v. Holmes, 104 A.D.3d 1288, 1290, 960 ... ...
-
People v. Matthews
... ... Justice, 99 A.D.3d 1213, 1215, 951 N.Y.S.2d 802, lv. denied 20 N.Y.3d 1012, 960 N.Y.S.2d 355, 984 N.E.2d 330 ; People v. Workman, 56 A.D.3d 1155, 11561157, 868 N.Y.S.2d 430, lv. denied 12 N.Y.3d 789, 879 N.Y.S.2d 66, 906 N.E.2d 1100 ) or her siblings (see People v. Rivers, 82 A.D.3d 1623, 1623, 918 N.Y.S.2d 921, lv. denied 17 N.Y.3d 904, 933 N.Y.S.2d 659, 957 N.E.2d 1163 ; People v. Bassett, 55 A.D.3d 1434, 1436, 866 N.Y.S.2d 473, lv. denied 11 N.Y.3d 922, 874 N.Y.S.2d 7, 902 N.E.2d 441 ). The court provided extensive and repeated limiting instructions with respect ... ...
-
People v. Koonce
... ... Williams, 98 A.D.3d 1279, 1280, 951 N.Y.S.2d 616,lv. denied20 N.Y.3d 1066, 962 N.Y.S.2d 617, 985 N.E.2d 927;People v. Rivers, 82 A.D.3d 1623, 1624, 918 N.Y.S.2d 921,lv. denied17 N.Y.3d 904, 933 N.Y.S.2d 659, 957 N.E.2d 1163). Thus, defense counsel's failure to object to those comments cannot be said to have deprived defendant of effective assistance of counsel ( see People v. Hill, 82 A.D.3d 1715, 1716, 919 N.Y.S.2d ... ...
-
People v. Taylor
... ... Further, the court properly weighed the probative value of the evidence against the prejudicial impact by limiting the testimony to that statement (see People v. Rivers, 82 A.D.3d 1623, 1623, 918 N.Y.S.2d 921, lv. denied 17 N.Y.3d 904, 933 N.Y.S.2d 659, 957 N.E.2d 1163 ), and the court minimized the potential prejudice by providing a curative instruction (see People v. Holmes, 104 A.D.3d 1288, 1289, 960 N.Y.S.2d 831, lv. denied 22 N.Y.3d 1041, 981 N.Y.S.2d 375, 4 ... ...