People v. Bolden
This text of 445 N.E.2d 198 (People v. Bolden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
We do not reach the question of negative identification argued by defendant. On defendant’s attorney’s cross-examination of one of the victims, he asked whether she had ever said she did not get a good look at the perpetrator. Her unresponsive answer was that she had been shown a number of photographs at the time she made that statement. By failing to move to strike that unresponsive an[742]*742swer, defendant’s attorney opened the door to an explanation by the People concerning the circumstances under which she had seen the photographs (cf. People v Melendez, 55 NY2d 445, 451-452).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
445 N.E.2d 198, 58 N.Y.2d 741, 459 N.Y.S.2d 22, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3942, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bolden-ny-1982.