People v. Cruz

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Cruz

392 N.E.2d 565, 47 N.Y.2d 838, 418 N.Y.S.2d 578, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 2112

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 5, 1979

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 392 N.E.2d 565 (People v. Cruz) 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.

Bluebook

People v. Cruz, 392 N.E.2d 565, 47 N.Y.2d 838, 418 N.Y.S.2d 578, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 2112 (N.Y. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant’s wife, who on direct examination had not testified as a character witness, was cross-examined regarding defendant’s prior criminal record. While this was concededly error, such questioning did not rise to the level of constitutional error depriving defendant of a fair trial. In such circumstances, and in view of the court’s efforts to give curative instructions, the overwhelming evidence against defendant, and the lack of significant probability of acquittal absent such testimony, this cross-examination constituted harmless error (People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 241-242).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Fuchsberg concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant’s wife, who on direct examination had not testified as a character witness, was cross-examined regarding defendant’s prior criminal record. While this was concededly error, such questioning did not rise to the level of constitutional error depriving defendant of a fair trial. In such circumstances, and in view of the court’s efforts to give curative instructions, the overwhelming evidence against defendant, and the lack of significant probability of acquittal absent such testimony, this cross-examination constituted harmless error (People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 241-242).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Fuchsberg concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

392 N.E.2d 565, 47 N.Y.2d 838, 418 N.Y.S.2d 578, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 2112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cruz-ny-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack