People v. Turner

239 A.D.2d 447, 657 N.Y.S.2d 756, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5045
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 12, 1997
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 239 A.D.2d 447 (People v. Turner) 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. Turner, 239 A.D.2d 447, 657 N.Y.S.2d 756, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5045 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenberg, J.,) rendered December 5, 1994, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was arrested pursuant to a so-called "buy and bust” operation. A team of officers, some working undercover, went to a location known for drug-related activity to buy heroin. When the defendant’s unapprehended accomplice attempted to sell to an officer what appeared to be crack cocaine, the officer refused and stated that he wanted heroin. At that point, at the accomplice’s direction, the defendant sold the officer one glassine envelope of heroin. A search of the defendant at the time of his arrest revealed that he had the undercover officer’s prerecorded money on his person.

The court’s Sandoval ruling allowing the prosecution to cross-examine the defendant regarding a previous gun possession conviction which occurred 15 years ago did not constitute error. Temporal remoteness of a conviction, standing alone, [448]*448does not preclude its use on cross-examination to impeach the defendant’s credibility (see, e.g., People v Trichilo, 230 AD2d 926; People v Moise, 199 AD2d 423; People v Ortiz, 156 AD2d 197). The prior offense was probative of the defendant’s willingness to place his interests above those of society (see, People v McClainin, 178 AD2d 495; People v Handy, 123 AD2d 398).

Additionally, the defendant’s sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Miller, J. P., Altman, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Tripp v. Williams
39 Misc. 3d 318 (New York Supreme Court, 2013)
People v. McClain
61 A.D.3d 703 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
People v. Jones
41 A.D.3d 507 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
People v. Ashley
15 Misc. 3d 80 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
People v. Myron
28 A.D.3d 681 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
People v. Stewartson
25 A.D.3d 629 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
People v. Caldwell
23 A.D.3d 576 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
People v. Cruz
21 A.D.3d 967 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
People v. Springer
13 A.D.3d 657 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
People v. Forino
287 A.D.2d 519 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
People v. Butler
278 A.D.2d 424 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
239 A.D.2d 447, 657 N.Y.S.2d 756, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5045, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-turner-nyappdiv-1997.