People v. Watts

118 A.D.2d 671, 500 N.Y.S.2d 22, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54536
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 10, 1986
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 118 A.D.2d 671 (People v. Watts) 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. Watts, 118 A.D.2d 671, 500 N.Y.S.2d 22, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54536 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.), rendered April 10, 1981, convicting him of robbery in the second degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

We find that at the joint trial of three perpetrators, the court properly admitted into evidence a reference to a code[672]*672fendant’s possession of a revolver at the time of the arrest of the three. This evidence was relevant to the acting in concert element of the robbery charge, to the jury’s assessment of the complainant’s credibility, and to complete the complainant’s narrative of the incident (see, People v Gines, 36 NY2d 932; People v Lopez, 59 AD2d 767).

Additionally, we find that the court properly exercised its discretion when it ruled that the prosecutor could use two out of five prior involvements with the law for impeachment purposes should the defendant take the stand. The defendant failed to meet his burden of proving that the prejudice which would have resulted from admission of the two matters outweighed the probative value on the assessment of his credibility (see, People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371). We do not reach the issue of whether the rule enunciated in Luce v United States (469 US 38) should be adopted by the courts of this State, in view of our determination that the defendant’s claim would have no merit in any event. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. Mollen, P. J., Lazer, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Stimus
136 A.D.2d 908 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
People v. Hudson
134 A.D.2d 615 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
118 A.D.2d 671, 500 N.Y.S.2d 22, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54536, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-watts-nyappdiv-1986.