People v. Sprague

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sprague

13 A.D.3d 1143, 786 N.Y.S.2d 755, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16290

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

DecidedDecember 30, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 13 A.D.3d 1143 (People v. Sprague) 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. Sprague, 13 A.D.3d 1143, 786 N.Y.S.2d 755, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16290 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Ontario County Court (Frederic T. Henry, Jr., J.), rendered December 12, 2001. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of felony driving while intoxicated and driving while ability impaired.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum:

Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of, inter alia, driving while intoxicated (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 [2]; § 1193 [1] [c] [ii]). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that he was denied a fair trial because County Court sustained certain objections made by the prosecutor during cross-examination of a witness for the prosecution (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v George, 67 NY2d 817, 818-819 [1986]). In any event, defendant’s contention is without merit. Present—Pine, J.P., Scudder, Kehoe, Smith and Lawton, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Ontario County Court (Frederic T. Henry, Jr., J.), rendered December 12, 2001. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of felony driving while intoxicated and driving while ability impaired.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum:

Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of, inter alia, driving while intoxicated (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 [2]; § 1193 [1] [c] [ii]). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that he was denied a fair trial because County Court sustained certain objections made by the prosecutor during cross-examination of a witness for the prosecution (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v George, 67 NY2d 817, 818-819 [1986]). In any event, defendant’s contention is without merit. Present—Pine, J.P., Scudder, Kehoe, Smith and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 A.D.3d 1143, 786 N.Y.S.2d 755, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16290, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sprague-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack