People v. Purnell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Purnell

294 A.D.2d 128, 740 N.Y.S.2d 877, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5247

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

DecidedMay 7, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 294 A.D.2d 128 (People v. Purnell) 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. Purnell, 294 A.D.2d 128, 740 N.Y.S.2d 877, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5247 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Phylis Skloot Bamberger, J.), rendered April 11, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 8 to 16 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court’s Sandoval ruling, permitting the prosecutor to impeach defendant’s credibility with his five felony convictions, without identifying the crimes or eliciting any other information about these convictions except their dates, balanced the appropriate factors and was a proper exercise of discretion (see, People v Walker, 83 NY2d 455, 458-459).

Defendant’s claim that the court’s alleged interjections into the trial demonstrated that the trial was conducted in a biased [129]*129manner is unpreserved (People v Charleston, 56 NY2d 886), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the court did not unduly interject itself, or conduct the trial in a biased manner, and that defendant has not established that these interventions, each of which occurred outside the jury’s presence, caused him any prejudice (see, People v Davis, 289 AD2d 134).

We perceive no basis for a reduction of sentence. Concur— Williams, P.J., Nardelli, Saxe, Rosenberger and Marlow, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Phylis Skloot Bamberger, J.), rendered April 11, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 8 to 16 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court’s Sandoval ruling, permitting the prosecutor to impeach defendant’s credibility with his five felony convictions, without identifying the crimes or eliciting any other information about these convictions except their dates, balanced the appropriate factors and was a proper exercise of discretion (see, People v Walker, 83 NY2d 455, 458-459).

Defendant’s claim that the court’s alleged interjections into the trial demonstrated that the trial was conducted in a biased [129]*129manner is unpreserved (People v Charleston, 56 NY2d 886), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the court did not unduly interject itself, or conduct the trial in a biased manner, and that defendant has not established that these interventions, each of which occurred outside the jury’s presence, caused him any prejudice (see, People v Davis, 289 AD2d 134).

We perceive no basis for a reduction of sentence. Concur— Williams, P.J., Nardelli, Saxe, Rosenberger and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 128, 740 N.Y.S.2d 877, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-purnell-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack