Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the defendant's convictions for unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, aggravated harassment in the second degree, and harassment in the second degree. The court found the evidence legally sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence to support the jury's verdict. Several appellate claims regarding jury instructions, juror discharge, and prosecutorial misconduct were deemed unpreserved or harmless error.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, aggravated harassment in the second degree, and harassment in the second degree.
- Whether the jury charge on harassment in the second degree was defective for failing to define "public place".
- Whether the trial court erred in discharging juror No. 12 and substituting an alternate juror.
- Whether prosecutor misconduct on summation warranted reversal of the convictions.
- Whether the appellate court should exercise its interest‑of‑justice jurisdiction to reach any of the unpreserved issues.
Holdings
- The evidence was legally sufficient to establish each of the charged offenses, and the convictions are affirmed.
- The issue was unpreserved for appellate review; even if error, it is at most harmless error.
- The contention is unpreserved for appellate review and therefore dismissed.
- The alleged misconduct was unpreserved and, even if reviewed, constituted fair comment and did not prejudice the defendant.
- The court declines to exercise its interest‑of‑justice jurisdiction.
Factual background
The defendant prevented the complainant, who was pregnant, from leaving by grabbing and squeezing her arms for about 25 minutes, threatening suicide, after she discovered his texting and exchanging explicit material with other women. The jury found him guilty of unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, aggravated harassment in the second degree, and harassment in the second degree.
Procedural history
The trial court convicted the defendant of three offenses based on a jury verdict. The defendant appealed, asserting insufficiency of the evidence, improper jury charge, juror replacement error, prosecutor misconduct, and other issues. The Appellate Division reviewed the record and affirmed the judgment.