People v. Felder

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Felder

192 A.D.2d 1111, 598 N.Y.S.2d 747, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4132

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

DecidedApril 14, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 192 A.D.2d 1111 (People v. Felder) 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. Felder, 192 A.D.2d 1111, 598 N.Y.S.2d 747, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4132 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The trial court properly exercised its discretion in permitting cross-examination of defendant regarding two felony convictions and two misdemeanor convictions. The court reduced the possibility of prejudice by precluding the prosecutor from disclosing the nature and underlying facts of the crimes (see, People v Marr, 177 AD2d 964, 965).

Defendant’s remaining contentions that the court erred in admitting improper bolstering testimony and in instructing the jury regarding reasonable doubt were not preserved for review (CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Hill, 154 AD2d 887, lv denied 75 NY2d 813; People v Moore, 105 AD2d 853), and review in the interest of justice is not warranted. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Sirkin, J. — Burglary, 2nd Degree.) Present — Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The trial court properly exercised its discretion in permitting cross-examination of defendant regarding two felony convictions and two misdemeanor convictions. The court reduced the possibility of prejudice by precluding the prosecutor from disclosing the nature and underlying facts of the crimes (see, People v Marr, 177 AD2d 964, 965).

Defendant’s remaining contentions that the court erred in admitting improper bolstering testimony and in instructing the jury regarding reasonable doubt were not preserved for review (CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Hill, 154 AD2d 887, lv denied 75 NY2d 813; People v Moore, 105 AD2d 853), and review in the interest of justice is not warranted. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Sirkin, J. — Burglary, 2nd Degree.) Present — Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

192 A.D.2d 1111, 598 N.Y.S.2d 747, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-felder-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack