Opinion
2013-02-13
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Dillon RICKMAN, appellant.
Raymond L. Colon, New York, N.Y., for appellant. Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Ruth E. Ross, and Virginia A. Farmer of counsel), for respondent.
Raymond L. Colon, New York, N.Y., for appellant. Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Ruth E. Ross, and Virginia A. Farmer of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Del Giudice, J.), rendered February 17, 2011, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
*906ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
A witness's trial testimony ordinarily may not be bolstered with pretrial statements ( see People v. McDaniel, 81 N.Y.2d 10, 16, 595 N.Y.S.2d 364, 611 N.E.2d 265). However, evidence that a victim of sexual assault promptly complained about the incident is admissible to corroborate the allegation that an assault took place ( see id. at 16, 595 N.Y.S.2d 364, 611 N.E.2d 265). One limitation on the admissibility of such evidence is that “only the fact of a complaint, not its accompanying details, may be elicited” ( id. at 17, 595 N.Y.S.2d 364, 611 N.E.2d 265). Here, contrary to the defendant's contention, the complained-of testimony did not exceed the allowable level of detail ( see People v. Bernardez, 63 A.D.3d 1174, 1175, 881 N.Y.S.2d 316;Matter of Christian V., 46 A.D.3d 831, 832, 848 N.Y.S.2d 309;People v. Salazar, 234 A.D.2d 322, 650 N.Y.S.2d 1002).
The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675).