The court providently exercised its discretion in admitting into evidence a photograph of a tattoo in defendant's genital area. The photograph was relevant to corroborate the victim's testimony that she saw the tattoo when defendant first engaged in inappropriate sexual conduct with her when she was 12 years old, the basis for one of the rape charges (see Penal Law § 130.35[4]). Thus, it cannot be said that its "sole purpose" was to arouse the emotions of the...
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.
