Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Stephen R. COOK, Appellant.
OPINION OF THE COURT
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Defendant contends that the court erred in admitting evidence concerning his prior uncharged acts of violence toward his paramour, the complainant. He had been indicted for forcible rape, sexual abuse, menacing, felonious assault, and criminal contempt, alleged to have been committed on three days over an 11-week period. He was acquitted of the forcible rape and convicted of the other crimes.
Evidence of prior uncharged crimes may be admitted to establish some element of the crime under consideration (see, People v. Alvino, 71 N.Y.2d 233, 241, 525 N.Y.S.2d 7, 519 N.E.2d 808; see also, People v. Lewis, 69 N.Y.2d 321, 326-327, 514 N.Y.S.2d 205, 506 N.E.2d 915; Prince, Richardson on Evidence § 4-515, at 191-192 [Farrell 11th ed.] ). The evidence will be allowed if its probative value exceeds the potential for prejudice to the defendant (see, People v. Ely, 68 N.Y.2d 520, 529, 510 N.Y.S.2d 532, 503 N.E.2d 88), a determination turning on the “discretionary balancing of the probative value and the need for the evidence against the potential for delay, surprise and prejudice” (People v. Alvino, supra, at 242, 525 N.Y.S.2d 7, 519 N.E.2d 808; People v. Ventimiglia, 52 N.Y.2d 350, 359, 438 N.Y.S.2d 261, 420 N.E.2d 59). Accordingly, and when appropriate-as here, in light of the relationship between defendant and complainant-evidence of a defendant's prior abusive behavior toward a complainant may be admissible to prove the element of forcible compulsion in a rape case (see, e.g., People v. McClain, 250 A.D.2d 871, 672 N.Y.S.2d 503; People v. George, 197 A.D.2d 588, 589, 602 N.Y.S.2d 643, lv. denied 82 N.Y.2d 925, 610 N.Y.S.2d 177, 632 N.E.2d 487, 83 N.Y.2d 852, 612 N.Y.S.2d 384, 634 N.E.2d 985). This is true even though, as in this case, the defense is not consensual sex, but that the rape never occurred and that the complainant's allegation was a lie.
Order affirmed in a memorandum.
MEMORANDUM.
Chief Judge KAYE and Judges BELLACOSA, SMITH, LEVINE, CIPARICK, WESLEY and ROSENBLATT concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: February 23, 1999
Court: Court of Appeals of New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)