People v. Watts
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
In fashioning its Sandoval ruling (see People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371 [1974]), the Supreme Court “struck an appropriate balance between the probative value of the defendant’s prior crimes and the possible prejudice to the defendant” (People v Townsend, 70 AD3d 982, 982 [2010]; see People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371 [1974]). A defendant is not insulated from impeachment by use of past convictions merely because those crimes are similar to the crime charged (see People v Pavao, 59 NY2d 282, 292 [1983]; People v Aguayo, 85 AD3d 809, 810 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 812 [2011]; People v Springer, 13…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- People v. SandovalNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- People v. PavaoNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- People v. RosenNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
- People v. RiveraNew York Court of Appeals · 2005
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. HarrisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. BazemoreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- People v. DingleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- People v. BazemoreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- People v. HarrisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.