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, etc., respondent, v. Carlos RIVERA, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered July 21, 2004, convicting him of assault in the second degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and tampering with physical evidence, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in declining to voir dire the jury about a local news article which had appeared during the trial (see People v. Shulman, 6 N.Y.3d 1, 32, 809 N.Y.S.2d 485, 843 N.E.2d 125, cert. denied 547 U.S. 1043, 126 S.Ct. 1623, 164 L.Ed.2d 339; People v. Moore, 42 N.Y.2d 421, 433-434, 397 N.Y.S.2d 975, 366 N.E.2d 1330, cert. denied 434 U.S. 987, 98 S.Ct. 617, 54 L.Ed.2d 482). Other than mere publication of the article, there was no indication that the article had been “ placed before the jury” (People v. Brown, 48 N.Y.2d 388, 394, 423 N.Y.S.2d 461, 399 N.E.2d 51). In any event, the prejudice to the defendant would have been minimal under the circumstances.
The defendant's remaining contention regarding his adjudication as a persistent violent felony offender is unpreserved for appellate review since he failed to raise any objection at sentencing (see People v. Daniels, 5 N.Y.3d 738, 740, 800 N.Y.S.2d 369, 833 N.E.2d 704, cert. denied 546 U.S. 988, 126 S.Ct. 573, 163 L.Ed.2d 479; People v. Rosen, 96 N.Y.2d 329, 728 N.Y.S.2d 407, 752 N.E.2d 844, cert. denied 534 U.S. 899, 122 S.Ct. 224, 151 L.Ed.2d 160). In any event, it is without merit (see People v. Rivera, 5 N.Y.3d 61, 800 N.Y.S.2d 51, 833 N.E.2d 194, cert. denied 546 U.S. 984, 126 S.Ct. 564, 163 L.Ed.2d 473; People v. Rosen, supra ).
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: July 25, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)