People v. Vredenburg
This text of 110 A.D.2d 730 (People v. Vredenburg) 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
It was not error for Criminal Term to deny a motion for mistrial brought by defense counsel after a prosecution witness volunteered that he had been asked to take a polygraph test. The court immediately sustained the objection and issued a prompt curative instruction. This corrected the error and minimized the prejudice which otherwise might have resulted from the unsolicited remark (see, People v Timmons, 95 AD2d 955).
We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be either meritless or harmless error in view of the overwhelming evidence of guilt. Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Thompson and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
110 A.D.2d 730, 488 N.Y.S.2d 199, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48635, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-vredenburg-nyappdiv-1985.