People v. Hendrix

190 A.D.2d 752
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 8, 1993
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 190 A.D.2d 752 (People v. Hendrix) 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. Hendrix, 190 A.D.2d 752 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Cooper-man, J.), rendered June 17, 1991, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, it was not an improvident exercise of discretion for the trial court to exclude the testimony of the defendant’s parole officer and sister regarding complaints he had made about drugs being sold from his house. The excluded testimony was irrelevant and not probative of the issue of the defendant’s guilt or innocence (see, People v Burnell, 151 AD2d 926, 927; People v Pike, 131 AD2d 890, 891). Further, we find that the court’s revised Sandoval ruling was proper and did not deprive the defendant of his constitutional right to a fair trial (see, People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371; People v Garcia, 160 AD2d 258, 259). Finally, in light of the defendant’s prior criminal record, the sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Thompson, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Hendrix
203 A.D.2d 479 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
190 A.D.2d 752, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hendrix-nyappdiv-1993.