People v Bethea

Annotate this Case
People v Bethea 2006 NY Slip Op 08141 [34 AD3d 489] November 8, 2006 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, January 17, 2007

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v
Gus Bethea, Appellant.

—[*1]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.), rendered May 12, 2003, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant has not preserved for appellate review his contention that the Supreme Court improperly failed to conduct a Ventimiglia hearing (see People v Ventimiglia, 52 NY2d 350 [1981]) to determine the admissibility of certain testimony regarding a telephone call made by the defendant's friend to one of the complainants (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 19 [1995]; People v Cody, 149 AD2d 722 [1989]). In any event, such testimony was properly introduced as some evidence of the defendant's consciousness of guilt (see People v Plummer, 36 NY2d 161, 163-164 [1975]; People v Almestica, 288 AD2d 483 [2001]; People v Pitts, 218 AD2d 715 [1995]). Additionally, the Supreme Court gave the jury proper limiting instructions (see People v Almestica, supra).

The defendant was not denied his right to effective assistance of counsel (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 714 [1998]; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Ritter, J.P., Goldstein, Rivera and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.