People v. Goldring
This text of 169 A.D.2d 638 (People v. Goldring) 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
Judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Eve Preminger, J.), rendered June 4, 1987, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree, for which defendant was sentenced as a predicate felon to 3Vi to 7 years’ imprisonment, unanimously affirmed. Order of the same court entered May 16, 1990, which [639]*639denied defendant’s motion pursuant to CPL article 440, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant’s contention that the trial prosecutor violated the court’s Sandoval ruling is meritless. After defendant was caught in inconsistencies on cross-examination, the prosecutor, at a sidebar conference, requested a modification of the Sandoval ruling to permit the limited use of defendant’s criminal history sheet to refresh his recollection about defendant’s prior familiarity with the neighborhood. Defendant’s own testimony opened the door to the modification of the Sandoval ruling (see, Harris v New York, 401 US 222, 226), and the details of defendant’s plea to petit larceny in 1985 were blurted out by defendant himself, rather than elicited by specific questions. Under these circumstances, we find no infirmity in the prosecutor’s cross-examination. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Smith and Rubin, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
169 A.D.2d 638, 565 N.Y.S.2d 25, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 720, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-goldring-nyappdiv-1991.