From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Mediak

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 14, 1995
217 A.D.2d 961 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

July 14, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Wolfgang, J.

Present — Denman, P.J., Green, Pine, Callahan and Davis, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him of numerous counts of sodomy, attempted sodomy, incest, attempted incest, sexual abuse, and endangering the welfare of a child. Defendant contends that he was deprived of a fair trial by the prosecutor's failure to obtain a pretrial Ventimiglia ruling, by Supreme Court's receipt into evidence of proof of uncharged crimes and by the court's failure to give a limiting instruction with respect to such evidence.

Defendant failed to object to the admission of the evidence in question, to the People's failure to seek a Ventimiglia ruling, or to the court's charge, and did not request a limiting instruction. Thus, defendant's contentions are unpreserved for our review ( see, CPL 470.05). Even assuming, arguendo, that the proof was not properly admissible on the counts charging defendant with endangering the welfare of a child, defendant was not deprived of a fair trial by the passing references to prior uncharged crimes, which references were brief and tangential and not likely to divert the jury's attention from the specific offenses charged in the indictment.


Summaries of

People v. Mediak

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 14, 1995
217 A.D.2d 961 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Mediak

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CHRISTOPHER MEDIAK…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Jul 14, 1995

Citations

217 A.D.2d 961 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
631 N.Y.S.2d 264

Citing Cases

The State of New York v. Gregory Williams

Because defendant failed to object to the court's instructions, that issue has not been preserved for our…

People v. Spencer

Because defendant did not object to such testimony, however, his contention is unpreserved for our review (…