People v. Bashar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bashar

204 A.D.2d 1023, 613 N.Y.S.2d 89, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6849

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 27, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 204 A.D.2d 1023 (People v. Bashar) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Bashar, 204 A.D.2d 1023, 613 N.Y.S.2d 89, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6849 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unani[1024]*1024mously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject defendant’s contention that the trial court abused its discretion in allowing the prosecutor to cross-examine defendant about a prior conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree. Although that crime is similar to the crimes charged, cross-examination for impeachment purposes was properly permitted (see, People v Pavao, 59 NY2d 282, 292; People v Breneman, 192 AD2d 1084, Iv denied 81 NY2d 1011). The court also properly exercised its discretion in discharging a sworn juror and replacing him with an alternate juror after determining that the sworn juror would be hospitalized for at least three days (see, People v McDermott, 201 AD2d 913). Defendant’s sentence is not harsh or excessive. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Doyle, J.—Murder, 2nd Degree.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Lawton, Wesley and Callahan, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Judgment unani[1024]*1024mously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject defendant’s contention that the trial court abused its discretion in allowing the prosecutor to cross-examine defendant about a prior conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree. Although that crime is similar to the crimes charged, cross-examination for impeachment purposes was properly permitted (see, People v Pavao, 59 NY2d 282, 292; People v Breneman, 192 AD2d 1084, Iv denied 81 NY2d 1011). The court also properly exercised its discretion in discharging a sworn juror and replacing him with an alternate juror after determining that the sworn juror would be hospitalized for at least three days (see, People v McDermott, 201 AD2d 913). Defendant’s sentence is not harsh or excessive. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Doyle, J.—Murder, 2nd Degree.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Lawton, Wesley and Callahan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 A.D.2d 1023, 613 N.Y.S.2d 89, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6849, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bashar-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack