People v. Fair

35 A.D.2d 519, 312 N.Y.S.2d 353, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4164
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 2, 1970·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Concur—Stevens, P. J., Eager and Nunez, JJ.; McGivern and McNally, JJ., dissent in the following memorandum by McNally, J.: I would affirm the judgment of conviction. Cross-examination of the defendant was well within the bounds set out in People v. Alamo (23 N Y 2d 630). The Assistant District Attorney presented to the trial court fully and fairly the basis for his cross-examination of the defendant relative to the Marcus and Ferrusa incidents. The trial court found and the record fully substantiates the cross-examination was conducted upon a good-faith factual basis. I am aware that the Court of Appeals will not review a criminal case where the Appellate Division reverses and in the interest of justice directs a new trial. (People v. Campbell, 25 N Y 2d 784; People v. Rossi, 11 N Y 2d 787, 788; People v. Mendola, 2 N Y 2d 270, 274; People v. Redmond, 225 N. Y. 206, 208; Cohen and Karger, Powers of the Court of Appeals [rev. ed.], p. 754.) I have grave doubts as to the reversal here in the interest of justice. It would seem to me the reversal in the instant case is one on law. I find no basis in the record for a reversal in the interest of justice and the majority in my opinion based the reversal solely on the alleged improper cross-examination.

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

People v. Fair, 35 A.D.2d 519, 312 N.Y.S.2d 353, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4164 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1970).

35 A.D.2d 519 (People v. Fair) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Aiello
58 A.D.2d 875 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1977)
People v. London
53 A.D.2d 875 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)