People v. GardnerPeople v. Gardner
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of attempted kidnapping in the second degree (
Defendant further contends that the court erred in denying his request to redact two sentences from his statement in which he described his commission of an uncharged prior bad act. We reject that contention. Those two sentences were relevant to establish that defendant intended to abduct the victim and did not merely intend to play a joke or prank, as suggested by the theory of the defense (see People v Alvino, 71 NY2d 233, 241-242 [1987]; People v Milot, 305 AD2d 729, 731 [2003], lv denied 100 NY2d 585 [2003]), and their probative value outweighed their prejudicial effect (see People v Brumfield, 236 AD2d 839 [1997], lv denied 89 NY2d 1032 [1997]; see generally People v Ventimiglia, 52 NY2d 350, 359 [1981]). Also contrary to defendant‘s contention, the court properly exercised its discre
We agree with defendant, however, that the court erred at sentencing in allowing the prosecutor to read into the record a list of defendant‘s alleged prior bad acts. “Although a court may consider uncharged crimes in sentencing a defendant, it ‘must assure itself that the information upon which it bases the sentence is reliable and accurate’ ” (People v Bratcher, 291 AD2d 878, 879 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 673 [2002], quoting People v Outley, 80 NY2d 702, 712 [1993]), and the court did not do so here. We therefore modify the judgment by vacating the sentence, and we remit the matter to Monroe County Court for resentencing. In light of our determination, we do not address defendant‘s remaining contention concerning the severity of the sentence. Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Scudder, Kehoe, Green and Hayes, JJ.