People v. Beaulieu

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Beaulieu

40 A.D.2d 942, 339 N.Y.S.2d 234, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3248

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

DecidedNovember 30, 1972

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 40 A.D.2d 942 (People v. Beaulieu) 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. Beaulieu, 40 A.D.2d 942, 339 N.Y.S.2d 234, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3248 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We note that the trial court’s ruling, foreclosing the People from introducing through a rebuttal witness evidence contradictory of defendant’s testimony and that of his character witnesses as to how he treated his and other children, was erroneous. It is well settled that once a defendant has introduced evidence of his good character, the prosecution may prove his bad character by cross-examining him and his witnesses and by calling rebuttal witnesses (People v. Kass, 25 N Y 2d 123; Richardson Evidence [9th ed.], §§ 156-158). In addition, the District Attorney’s offer of rebuttal testimony had a reasonable basis and was made in good faith, and did not constitute error (People v. Kass, supra; People v. Schwartzman, 24 N Y 2d 241, 244). (Appeal from judgment of Onondaga County Court, convicting defendant of manslaughter, second degree.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Del Vecchio, Witmer, Cardamone and Henry, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We note that the trial court’s ruling, foreclosing the People from introducing through a rebuttal witness evidence contradictory of defendant’s testimony and that of his character witnesses as to how he treated his and other children, was erroneous. It is well settled that once a defendant has introduced evidence of his good character, the prosecution may prove his bad character by cross-examining him and his witnesses and by calling rebuttal witnesses (People v. Kass, 25 N Y 2d 123; Richardson Evidence [9th ed.], §§ 156-158). In addition, the District Attorney’s offer of rebuttal testimony had a reasonable basis and was made in good faith, and did not constitute error (People v. Kass, supra; People v. Schwartzman, 24 N Y 2d 241, 244). (Appeal from judgment of Onondaga County Court, convicting defendant of manslaughter, second degree.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Del Vecchio, Witmer, Cardamone and Henry, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.D.2d 942, 339 N.Y.S.2d 234, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3248, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-beaulieu-nyappdiv-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack