People v. Reed

2025 NY Slip Op 02514 · Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department · April 25, 2025 · No. 405 KA 23-01851

Summary

This uncorrected slip opinion from the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, affirms a defendant's conviction for grand larceny in the fourth degree. The court rejected multiple appellate claims, including that the trial court improperly excluded testimony about past domestic violence, that the evidence was legally insufficient or against the weight of the evidence, and that the sentence was unduly harsh. The judgment of the Ontario County Court is unanimously affirmed.

Court
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
Writing for the Court
BANNISTER, J.P.; MONTOUR; SMITH; NOWAK; HANNAH
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
April 25, 2025
Docket number
405 KA 23-01851
Procedural posture
Appeal from a judgment of the Ontario County Court convicting the defendant of grand larceny in the fourth degree.
Standard of review
abuse of discretion
Precedential value
published
Parties
Breanna L. Reed v. People of the State of New York
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

criminal procedureevidenceappellate procedure

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the trial court erred in excluding the defendant's testimony about a prior domestic‑violence incident.
  2. Whether the evidence was admissible and sufficient to support the conviction.

Holdings

  1. The trial court did not err; it properly exercised its discretion to exclude the testimony because it was too remote or speculative to show lack of intent.
  2. The evidence was legally sufficient to support the conviction.

Key quotations

[C]ourts . . . have the discretion to exclude evidence sought to be introduced by a defendant where such evidence is irrelevant or constitutes hearsay, and its probative value is 'outweighed by the dangers of speculation, confusion, and prejudice' . . . , or where such evidence is 'too slight, remote or conjectural to have any legitimate influence in determining the fact in issue' (1556)

Factual background

Breanna L. Reed was convicted by a jury of grand larceny in the fourth degree. At trial she sought to introduce testimony concerning a domestic‑violence incident involving her former boyfriend, which the trial court excluded. The appellate court considered whether the exclusion was proper under evidentiary rules.

Procedural history

The Ontario County Court rendered a judgment on June 8, 2023, convicting Breanna L. Reed of grand larceny in the fourth degree. Reed appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in excluding her testimony about a prior domestic‑violence incident. The Appellate Division reviewed the trial court's discretionary exclusion of the evidence.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…