People v. Jarvis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Jarvis

111 A.D.2d 262, 489 N.Y.S.2d 98, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51384

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

DecidedMay 13, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 111 A.D.2d 262 (People v. Jarvis) 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. Jarvis, 111 A.D.2d 262, 489 N.Y.S.2d 98, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51384 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Clabby, J.), rendered February 23,1984, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Since defense counsel extensively cross-examined the sole eyewitness to the murder with respect to his lengthy criminal record and the testimony sought to be elicited bore only upon collateral matters of general credibility, any error which may have been committed by the trial court in refusing to allow further inquiry into the witness’ criminal background was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Allen, 67 AD2d 558, affd 50 NY2d 898 on opn of Presiding Justice Mollen at App Div).

We have examined defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. O’Connor, J. P., Weinstein, Brown and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Clabby, J.), rendered February 23,1984, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Since defense counsel extensively cross-examined the sole eyewitness to the murder with respect to his lengthy criminal record and the testimony sought to be elicited bore only upon collateral matters of general credibility, any error which may have been committed by the trial court in refusing to allow further inquiry into the witness’ criminal background was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Allen, 67 AD2d 558, affd 50 NY2d 898 on opn of Presiding Justice Mollen at App Div).

We have examined defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. O’Connor, J. P., Weinstein, Brown and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 A.D.2d 262, 489 N.Y.S.2d 98, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51384, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jarvis-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack