Defendant has failed to preserve his claims that the People should have sought an advance ruling on the admissibility of uncharged crime evidence, and that the court should have given the jury a sua sponte limiting instruction thereon, and we decline to review these claims in the interest of justice. Were we to review them, we would find that there was no prejudice to defendant in these regards (see, People v Ramos,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
PEOPLE v. ROLDAN
238 A.D.2d 255 (1997)
656 N.Y.S.2d 873
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Charles Roldan, Appellant
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
April 22, 1997
April 22, 1997
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.