People v. Dinkins
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Bloom, J.
The factual background of this case is fully set forth in the opinion of my brother Fein. I agree that the cross-examination of defendant on his failure to register a complaint against Kurt, particularly in light of the emphasis given to the matter by the question put by the court, deprived defendant of his Fifth Amendment rights. It was, therefore, error so egregious as to mandate reversal. The cross-examination of his brother on the same subject, although improper, was error to a lesser degree and could have been cured by appropriate instruction (see concurring…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Delaware v. ProuseSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- People v. IngleNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- People v. HorowitzNew York Court of Appeals · 1967
- People v. BluittNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- People v. BurgosAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
3Cited by2 opinions
- People v. DinkinsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- People v. DinkinsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980