People v. Prashad
This text of 46 A.D.3d 844 (People v. Prashad) 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
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Roman, J.), rendered December 14, 2005, convicting him of assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was not denied a fair trial when the court permitted the prosecutor to question him regarding his failure to provide police officers with certain exculpatory information at the time of arrest. Generally, a defendant’s postarrest silence cannot be used for impeachment purposes (see People v Conyers, 52 NY2d 454, 459 [1981]). However, where, as here, a defendant speaks to the police and omits exculpatory information which he presents for the first time at trial, the defendant may be impeached with the omission (see People v Savage, 50 NY2d 673, 676, 679 [1980], cert denied 449 US 1016 [1980]; People v Blacks, 221 AD2d 351 [1995]; People v Spinelli, 214 AD2d 135, 139-141 [1995]; People v West, 212 AD2d 651, 652 [1995]; People v Harrison, 149 AD2d 434, 434-435 [1989]).
The defendant’s remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, is without merit. Miller, J.P., Crane, Dillon and Balkin, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
46 A.D.3d 844, 848 N.Y.S.2d 279, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-prashad-nyappdiv-2007.