People v. Salazar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Salazar

255 A.D.2d 270, 680 N.Y.S.2d 838, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12719

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

DecidedNovember 24, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 255 A.D.2d 270 (People v. Salazar) 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. Salazar, 255 A.D.2d 270, 680 N.Y.S.2d 838, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12719 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Tejada, J.), rendered June 12, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of grand larceny in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of IV2 to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court’s Sandoval ruling was a proper exercise of discretion in which the court carefully balanced the critical factors (see, People v Walker, 83 NY2d 455, 459), and permitted the People to inquire as to whether defendant had used different birth dates and birthplaces and as to whether defendant had been convicted of four prior misdemeanors and one felony, but precluded inquiry as to what those crimes were or into their underlying facts. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Tejada, J.), rendered June 12, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of grand larceny in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of IV2 to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court’s Sandoval ruling was a proper exercise of discretion in which the court carefully balanced the critical factors (see, People v Walker, 83 NY2d 455, 459), and permitted the People to inquire as to whether defendant had used different birth dates and birthplaces and as to whether defendant had been convicted of four prior misdemeanors and one felony, but precluded inquiry as to what those crimes were or into their underlying facts. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 A.D.2d 270, 680 N.Y.S.2d 838, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12719, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-salazar-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack