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. Bob WELLS, Defendant–Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce Allen, J.), rendered December 15, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted rape in the first degree, sexual abuse in the first degree and criminal trespass in the second degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 3 1/212 years, unanimously affirmed.
The court's Sandoval ruling permitting the prosecutor to cross-examine defendant about a prior bad act balanced the appropriate factors and was a proper exercise of discretion (People v. Hayes, 97 N.Y.2d 203, 738 N.Y.S.2d 663, 764 N.E.2d 963 [2002] ). There was a good faith basis for the prosecutor's inquiry (see People v. Alamo, 23 N.Y.2d 630, 633–635, 298 N.Y.S.2d 681, 246 N.E.2d 496 [1969], cert. denied 396 U.S. 879, 90 S.Ct. 156, 24 L.Ed.2d 137 [1969] ). The alleged bad act of sending harassing e-mails reflected a willingness to place defendant's self-interest above the interests of another person and was thus relevant to defendant's credibility (see e.g. People v. Weinstein, 254 A.D.2d 83, 680 N.Y.S.2d 204 [1998] ).
When a deliberating juror became unavailable, defendant specifically requested that the juror be replaced by the second alternate juror rather than the first, and executed a valid written consent to such replacement. Accordingly, defendant waived his argument that the court erred in departing from CPL 270.35(1) by seating the second alternate out of order (see People v. Acevedo, 44 A.D.3d 168, 171, 841 N.Y.S.2d 55 [2007], lv. denied 9 N.Y.3d 1004, 850 N.Y.S.2d 392, 880 N.E.2d 878 [2007] ), and there was no nonwaivable mode of proceedings error (see People v. Gajadhar, 9 N.Y.3d 438, 850 N.Y.S.2d 377, 880 N.E.2d 863 [2007] ).
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: May 01, 2008
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)