| People v Williams |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 03037 [50 AD3d 709] |
| April 1, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v EricWilliams, Appellant. |
—[*1] Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Michael Blakey of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.)rendered March 20, 2003, convicting him of murder in the second degree, assault in the firstdegree (two counts), criminal use of a firearm in the first degree, and criminal possession of aweapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he was denied his right to be present at an adjournedproceeding date is without merit because the proceeding at issue involved only questions of lawor procedure (see People v Roman, 88 NY2d 18, 27 [1996]; People v Diaz, 30 AD3d 436, 437[2006]; People v Rolle, 4 AD3d542, 543 [2004]).
Testimony of a witness regarding the circumstances under which the defendant confessed hisguilt to him with respect to the instant offenses was properly admitted as background informationnecessary to complete the narrative regarding the defendant's confession and explain why heconfessed (see People v Philips, 30AD3d 618, 619 [2006]; People v Gordon, 308 AD2d 461 [2003]).
While the better course would have been for the prosecutor to have obtained a ruling fromthe trial court regarding the admissibility of all testimony she sought to elicit from the People'switnesses regarding the defendant's prior uncharged crimes before such evidence was introducedinto [*2]the case (see People v Ventimiglia, 52 NY2d 350[1981]), any resultant error was harmless (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230 [1975];People v McCarthy, 293 AD2d 490, 491-492 [2002]).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit. Mastro, J.P., Dickerson, Belen andChambers, JJ., concur.