People v. Vanterpool
| Decision Date | 18 April 1995 |
| Citation | 625 N.Y.S.2d 38,214 A.D.2d 429 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Lorenzo VANTERPOOL, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
L. Feiner, for respondent.
K.E. Pflanz, for defendant-appellant.
Before ELLERIN, J.P., and RUBIN, TOM and MAZZARELLI, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered March 11, 1993, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of rape in the first degree and endangering the welfare of a child and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 3 to 9 years and 1 year imprisonment, respectively, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant's guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt and is supported by the weight of the evidence.
Considering the victim's young age and her expressed fear of serious punishment from her mother if she disclosed the fact of her rape, her complaint to a cousin within three weeks of the incident constituted a prompt outcry which was properly admitted as an exception to the hearsay rule and considered by the court (People v. McDaniel, 81 N.Y.2d 10, 595 N.Y.S.2d 364, 611 N.E.2d 265). The other claim with respect to this testimony, raised for the first time on appeal, is unpreserved and we decline to review in the interest of justice.
Defendant failed to raise and preserve his current constitutional claim with respect to the admissibility of hospital records where the unavailability of one of the doctors who made entries in the records was not established. Were we to reach the issue we would find that where the hearsay exception is justified by its compelling reliability--as in the business records exception--then the evidentiary rule is congruent with the values of the Confrontation Clause and the unavailability of the declarant is not required (see, People v. Persico, 157 A.D.2d 339, 348, 556 N.Y.S.2d 262, lv. denied 76 N.Y.2d 895, 561 N.Y.S.2d 558, 562 N.E.2d 883).
Finally, defendant agreed to and was given the benefit of assumptions of fact by the court in this nonjury trial which he might not have been able to establish through questioning of the complainant.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Manuel R. v. Regina F.
... ... hospital to see if Sarah was sexually active because Sarah ... had been out with people that Ms. Regina F. did not know. She ... described that after the hospital performed their ... examinations, they informed Ms. Regina F. and Sarah ... Stuckey, 50 A.D.3d 447, 448 (1st Dept. 2008) ... (disclosure at the end of a two-year course of sexual ... conduct); People v. Vanterpool, 214 A.D.2d 429 (1st ... Dept. 1995) (child's disclosure three weeks after ... incident). In this case, Sarah's disclosures occurred ... within a ... ...
-
People v. Picon
...40 A.D.3d 403, 835 N.Y.S.2d 577 [2007], lv. denied 9 N.Y.3d 872, 842 N.Y.S.2d 784, 874 N.E.2d 751 [2007]; People v. Vanterpool, 214 A.D.2d 429, 625 N.Y.S.2d 38 [1995], lv. denied 86 N.Y.2d 875, 635 N.Y.S.2d 956, 659 N.E.2d 779 [1995] ). By failing to object, or by failing to elaborate on hi......
-
Castro v. City of New York Department of Education, 2007 NY Slip Op 30728(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 4/11/2007)
...toward Nicolas and of the resulting injuries and had even told her that Joseph had caused such injuries. See People v Vanterpool, 214 A.D.2d 429 (1st Dept. 1995), lv denied 86 N.Y.2d 875 (1995); Henriques Kindercare Learning Ctr., Inc., 6 A.D.3d 220, 221 (1st 2004) (prompt outcry hearsay ex......
-
People v. Newsome
...to the prompt outcry exception to the hearsay rule (see, People v. Kornowski, 178 A.D.2d 984, 579 N.Y.S.2d 258; People v. Vanterpool, 214 A.D.2d 429, 625 N.Y.S.2d 38). The defendant's contention that the entire note was erroneously admitted into evidence is unpreserved for appellate review ......
-
Hearsay
...her four-year-old son’s statements to her that he was assaulted by classmates was admissible as a prompt outcry. People v. Vanterpool , 214 A.D.2d 429, 625 N.Y.S.2d 38 (1st Dept. 1995). Given the young age of the victim, and her fear of punishment if she told her mother, her disclosure of t......
-
Hearsay
...her four-year-old son’s statements to her that he was assaulted by classmates was admissible as a prompt outcry. People v. Vanterpool , 214 A.D.2d 429, 625 N.Y.S.2d 38 (1st Dept. 1995). Given the young age of the victim, and her fear of punishment if she told her mother, her disclosure of t......
-
Hearsay
...to her four-year-old son’s statements to her that he was assaulted by classmates was admissible as a prompt outcry. People v. Vanterpool, 214 A.D.2d 429, 625 N.Y.S.2d 38 (1st Dept. 1995). Given the young age of the victim, and her fear of punishment if she told her mother, her disclosure of......
-
Hearsay
...her four-year-old son’s statements to her that he was assaulted by classmates was admissible as a prompt outcry. People v. Vanterpool , 214 A.D.2d 429, 625 N.Y.S.2d 38 (1st Dept. 1995). Given the young age of the victim, and her fear of punishment if she told her mother, her disclosure of t......