People v. Brathwaite
This text of 254 A.D.2d 365 (People v. Brathwaite) 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.
Opinion
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Clabby, J.), rendered May 8, 1996, convicting him of robbery in the third degree and assault in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The trial court’s Sandoval ruling was not an improvident exercise of discretion (see, People v Mattiace, 77 NY2d 269, 275-276; People v Pavao, 59 NY2d 282, 292; People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371). The mere fact that a defendant committed crimes similar to the one charged does not automatically preclude the prosecutor from using evidence of such crimes for impeachment purposes (see, People v Mattiace, supra; People v Pavao, supra; People v McClam, 225 AD2d 799). The court’s ruling that the prosecutor could inquire into the underlying facts of the defendant’s conviction of murder and a bad act, i.e., the slashing by the defendant of another inmate, did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial nor prevent him from asserting an adequate defense (see, People v McClainin, 178 AD2d 495).
The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
254 A.D.2d 365, 681 N.Y.S.2d 544, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10742, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-brathwaite-nyappdiv-1998.