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. Carlos JOYNER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene Silverman, J.), rendered February 25, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the first degree (two counts) and attempted robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 10 to 20 years, 10 to 20 years, and 6 to 12 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.
The court's Sandoval ruling was a proper exercise of discretion (see, People v. Walker, 83 N.Y.2d 455, 459, 611 N.Y.S.2d 118, 633 N.E.2d 472). Defendant's prior felony conviction, the nature and underlying facts of which were precluded, was not excessively remote given defendant's incarceration during a substantial portion of the intervening years.
The court properly declined to instruct that the evidence must be considered separately as against each perpetrator since this was a single-defendant trial and the court's instructions made clear to the jury that they could only convict defendant if the evidence proved his individual guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The court properly exercised its discretion in admitting the disputed portions of the ballistics expert's testimony (see, People v. Scarola, 71 N.Y.2d 769, 777, 530 N.Y.S.2d 83, 525 N.E.2d 728). Defendant's challenges to this testimony affect its weight rather than its admissibility.
Defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: March 14, 2000
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 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)