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. Faruq Abdur-Rahman, appellant.
Argued-December 22, 2009
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Chun, J.), rendered May 17, 2007, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
As the People correctly concede, the Supreme Court improperly admitted into evidence a photograph of the victim taken when he was alive, since this evidence was not relevant to any material fact to be proved at trial (see People v. Stevens, 76 N.Y.2d 833, 835; People v. Mills, 48 AD3d 703; People v. Thompson, 34 AD3d 852, 854; People v. Rodriguez, 1 AD3d 386, 387; People v. Kershaw, 238 A.D.2d 523). However, the error was harmless, as there was overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see People v. Adamo, 309 A.D.2d 808; People v. Santiago, 255 A.D.2d 63), and no significant probability that the error contributed to his convictions (see People v. Mills, 48 AD3d 703; People v. Thompson, 34 AD3d 852; People v. Foss, 267 A.D.2d 505, 508).
As the People also correctly concede, it was improper for the trial court to permit the People to impeach their own witness whose testimony did not tend to disprove a material issue of the case (see CPL 60.35; People v. Fitzpatrick, 40 N.Y.2d 44). However, that error too was harmless, as there was overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt, and no significant probability that the error contributed to his convictions (see People v. Murillo, 256 A.D.2d 423, 424; People v. Comer, 146 A.D.2d 794, 795; People v. Pellot, 186 A.D.2d 158, 158).
SANTUCCI, J.P., DICKERSON, ENG and CHAMBERS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 2007-06449 (Ind.No. 6542 /06)
Decided: January 26, 2010
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)