Published on:

Defendant Claims Evidence was Prejudicial


This case is being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department, Appellate Division. The respondent for the case is the People of the State of New York. The appellant of the case is Abu Khan. The People of the State of New York are represented by Gary Fidel and Jill A Gross-Marks for counsel from the Richard A Brown, District Attorney for Kew Gardens New York, office. The appellant is represented by the law offices of Lynn W. L. Fahey with Jonathan M. Kratter for counsel.

A New York Drug Crime Lawyer said the defendant is appealing a judgment that was made by the Queens County Supreme Court on the 24th of July, 2007. The judgment found the defendant guilty of rape in the first degree, endangerment of the welfare of a child, sexual conduct against a child, and second degree sexual abuse.

Case Background

The Supreme Court of Queens County used its discretion in the matter to allow the prosecution to use evidence to show that the defendant had committed rape against a child that was younger than 11 years old.

The defendant was charged with sexually touching a child from 1997 through 2000 while the family lived in Queens and raping the victim in November of 2004. A New York Drug Possession Lawyer said the defendant also raped the victim on several occasions from 2001 through 2004 while the family lived in Florida.

The evidence in the case was submitted to show the defendant’s pattern of escalating sexual conduct against the victim during the time frame of the alleged crimes. The evidence was relevant background information to help the jury understand that the relationship with the defendant and the victim and to place the events into relevant context. This was particularly necessary because the defendant raised the question of the delayed disclosure of the charges from the victim.

The necessity of this evidence outweighed any type of prejudice towards the defendant. The jury was instructed about the proper use of evidence in the case. A Nassau County Drug Possession Lawyer said the jury was informed about how to properly use evidence in an uncharged crime.

Court Discussion and Decision

The court has reviewed all of the evidence in this matter. After careful review it is felt that the Queens County Supreme Court used proper discretion in allowing the prosecution to submit two photographs into evidence in this case. The evidence portrayed the victim at the ages of five and seven. This was the age of the victim at the time the incidents occurred. The evidence was used to show the physical appearance of the victim at the time of the sexual misconduct.

There was other evidence of the alleged crimes available in the case as well. A Queens Drug Possession Lawyer said the other evidence that was available did not require the photographs to be excluded from use during the trial.

After careful review the court denies the appeal from the defendant. The original verdict is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed.

Stephen Bilkis & Associates offers free consultations for anyone in need of legal advice. Our team of lawyers is happy to sit down with you and discuss your case. They will help you determine what your best course of action would be legally for your particular matter. We have offices located throughout the city of New York for your convenience. You may contact us at any time to set up an appointment to discuss your case.

Contact Information