Opinion
383
March 15, 2002.
Appeal from a judgment of Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Brunetti, J.), entered December 11, 2000, convicting defendant after a jury trial of, inter alia, murder in the second degree.
Frank H. Hiscock Legal Aid Society, Syracuse (Shirley K. Duffy of counsel), for defendant-appellant.
William J. Fitzpatrick, District Attorney, Syracuse (Mark Moody of counsel), for plaintiff-respondent.
PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., SCUDDER, KEHOE, BURNS, AND GORSKI, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
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 murder in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.25), burglary in the first degree (Penal Law § 140.30,[3]), and conspiracy in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 105.10) and sentencing him to an aggregate term of incarceration of 27 years to life. Supreme Court properly refused to require the prosecution to specify whether defendant was charged as a principal or an accessory ( see, People v. Sanchez, 278 A.D.2d 889, 890, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 763; People v. Skinner, 251 A.D.2d 1013, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 930, 1038). The verdict is not against the weight of the evidence ( see, People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495). The People did not violate the rule of completeness ( see, People v. Walker, 285 A.D.2d 364, lv denied 97 N.Y.2d 643; People v. Vega, 276 A.D.2d 349, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 764; see generally, People v. Dlugash, 41 N.Y.2d 725, 736; People v. La Belle, 18 N.Y.2d 405, 410-411; People v. Gallo, 12 N.Y.2d 12, 15) by seeking to introduce only a portion of a letter written by defendant where they did not possess the remaining portion of the letter. There was no improper bolstering in the admission of testimony concerning cooperation agreements between the People and various witnesses ( see, People v. Hayes, 226 A.D.2d 1055, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 936; People v. Gibbs, 210 A.D.2d 4, lv denied 85 N.Y.2d 938; People v. Cherry, 161 A.D.2d 185, 186-187, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 854; People v. Rivera, 155 A.D.2d 941, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 817). Nor did the court err in permitting a co-conspirator to testify concerning conversations in which defendant and others planned the crime ( see, People v. Rastelli, 37 N.Y.2d 240, 244-245, cert denied 423 U.S. 995; see also, People v. Berkowitz, 50 N.Y.2d 333, 341). Finally, we reject defendant's challenges to the severity of the sentence and to the constitutionality of New York's second felony offender sentencing scheme ( see, People v. Rosen, 96 N.Y.2d 329, 334-335, cert denied ___ U.S. ___, 122 S.Ct. 224; People v. Waller [appeal No. 1] , 288 A.D.2d 950).