From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Wilson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 8, 1998
252 A.D.2d 960 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Summary

In Wilson, the defendant committed burglary to assault the victim, and we refused to apply its rationale to our felony murder statute.

Summary of this case from People v. Cahill

Opinion

July 8, 1998

Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Mark, J. — Burglary, 3rd Degree.

Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Balio and Fallon, JJ.


Judgment affirmed. Memorandum: Supreme Court did not err in granting the motion by the People at the commencement of trial to amend their bill of particulars to allege that defendant committed burglary on three occasions by entering unlawfully. Testimony before the Grand Jury supported the charges in the indictment, which alleged with respect to each of the three counts of burglary that defendant entered or remained unlawfully in the building. The bill of particulars alleged that defendant remained unlawfully in the building on each occasion. Defendant was not prejudiced by the amendment because he was aware of the People's theory from the inception of the case, and he did not request an adjournment beyond that ordered by the court. Further, each burglary count in the indictment was associated with a count of criminal mischief that was related to commission of the burglary by unlawful entering. While the People failed to offer any explanation for the original bill of particulars, there is no evidence that the People acted in bad faith in seeking the amendment. Thus, the court properly permitted the amendment ( see, CPL 200.95; see also, People v. Medina, 233 A.D.2d 927, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 926).

Defendant did not object to the admission of testimony concerning statements he made to the police or to the admission of his written statement. Thus, he failed to preserve for our review his contention that such evidence was improperly admitted ( see, CPL 470.05; People v. Nunez, 242 A.D.2d 449, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 877), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice ( see, CPL 470.15 [a]).

All concur, Wisner, J., not participating.


Summaries of

People v. Wilson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 8, 1998
252 A.D.2d 960 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

In Wilson, the defendant committed burglary to assault the victim, and we refused to apply its rationale to our felony murder statute.

Summary of this case from People v. Cahill

In Wilson, the defendant, armed with a shotgun, broke a glass window in the outside door of his estranged wife's apartment building and entered her apartment, where she and three men were present. Initially, the defendant shot two of the men, killing one. He placed the muzzle of his shotgun against the door of the bathroom into which his wife had fled in a futile search for refuge, and shot the door off its hinges.

Summary of this case from People v. Cahill
Case details for

People v. Wilson

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ROBERT WILSON…

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

Date published: Jul 8, 1998

Citations

252 A.D.2d 960 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
675 N.Y.S.2d 731

Citing Cases

People v. Wright

In any event, the amendment merely narrowed the description of the weapon utilized by defendant during the…

People v. Lewis

The record supports the court's determination that the police did not use deception or trickery in order to…