People v Scott C. Eves

Annotate this Case
People v Eves 2006 NY Slip Op 03373 [28 AD3d 1231] April 28, 2006 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, June 21, 2006

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Scott C. Eves, Appellant.

—[*1]

Appeal from a judgment of the Jefferson County Court (Kim H. Martusewicz, J.), rendered January 12, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal mischief in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him of criminal mischief in the third degree (Penal Law § 145.05 [2]). Contrary to defendant's contention, County Court properly admitted a bystander's statement in evidence under the present sense impression exception to the hearsay rule (see generally People v Buie, 86 NY2d 501, 505-509 [1995]; People v Dann, 17 AD3d 1152 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 761 [2005]; People v Ortiz, 1 AD3d 1017, 1018 [2003], lv denied 1 NY3d 632 [2004]). "There was sufficient corroboration, by means of independent proof, of both the contemporaneity and reliability of the out-of-court declaration" (Ortiz, 1 AD3d at 1018; see generally People v Vasquez, 88 NY2d 561, 574-575 [1996]; People v Brown, 80 NY2d 729, 734-736 [1993]). Also contrary to defendant's contention, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Scudder, Kehoe, Pine and Hayes, JJ.

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.