Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in admitting into evidence four autopsy photographs of the victim. The challenged photographs were neither excessively gruesome nor introduced for the sole purpose of arousing the jurors' passions and prejudicing the defendant (see People v Wood,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.