People v. Melendez
Cases that cite this one
15 later published cases cite this decision.
- People v. Rock (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
- People v. Marji (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
- People v. Charles (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- LONG, WILLIAM, PEOPLE v (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- People v. Cockett (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- People v. Cockett (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- People v. Long (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- People v. Long (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- People v. Khan (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
- People v. Garson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
- People v. Bryan (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
- People v. Farmer (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
- People v. Wilson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
- People v. Freece (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
- People v. James (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s contention that the Supreme Court committed reversible error in permitting the People to elicit evidence of prior bad acts involving the complainant and the defendant is without merit. The evidence was properly admitted as relevant background material to enable the jury to understand the defendant’s relationship with the complainant, to explain the issuance of an order of protection, to establish the defendant’s motive and intent in the commission of the crimes, and to establish the complainant’s state of mind (see People v Alvino, 71 NY2d 233 [1987]; People v Ventimiglia, 52 NY2d 350 [1981]; People v Molineux, 168 NY 264 [1901]; People v Baltimore, 301 AD2d 610 [2003]; People v Lawrence, 297 AD2d 290 [2002]). In light of the Supreme Court’s limiting instruction, the probative value of this evidence outweighed any prejudicial effect (see People v Foy, 176 AD2d 893 [1991]).
The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Smith, J.P., Krausman, Adams and Skelos, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.