People v. Wells

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Wells

178 A.D.2d 105, 576 N.Y.S.2d 518, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15329

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

DecidedDecember 3, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 178 A.D.2d 105 (People v. Wells) 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. Wells, 178 A.D.2d 105, 576 N.Y.S.2d 518, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15329 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John A.K. Bradley, J.), rendered February 28, 1990, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of imprisonment of from 3 to 6 years, is unanimously affirmed.

[106]*106Pursuant to a pre-trial Sandoval ruling, the trial court allowed defendant to be cross-examined concerning the fact of certain prior convictions without elaboration of underlying facts or specific charges, and also to be cross-examined concerning his use of false names and other false personal information at the time of prior arrests. On appeal, defendant argues that he was denied a fair trial because of the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury not to infer a criminal propensity from the prior crimes. This issue is unpreserved and we decline to reach it. If we were to reach the issue in the interest of justice, we would find it to be without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Ellerin, Kassal and Smith, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John A.K. Bradley, J.), rendered February 28, 1990, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of imprisonment of from 3 to 6 years, is unanimously affirmed.

[106]*106Pursuant to a pre-trial Sandoval ruling, the trial court allowed defendant to be cross-examined concerning the fact of certain prior convictions without elaboration of underlying facts or specific charges, and also to be cross-examined concerning his use of false names and other false personal information at the time of prior arrests. On appeal, defendant argues that he was denied a fair trial because of the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury not to infer a criminal propensity from the prior crimes. This issue is unpreserved and we decline to reach it. If we were to reach the issue in the interest of justice, we would find it to be without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Ellerin, Kassal and Smith, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

178 A.D.2d 105, 576 N.Y.S.2d 518, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-wells-nyappdiv-1991.