Introducing Exa PlacesLearn more
Legal Opinion

People v. Crandall

New York Court of Appeals

Decided March 25, 1986PublishedCited by 101 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Meyer, J.

Evidence concerning sales of narcotics other than that for which defendant is on trial is improperly admitted as "inextricably intertwined” when it can be readily redacted and is not essential to proof of the crime in issue. Nor does a defendant "open the door” to admission of other crime evidence in rebuttal by his testimony that he made no sale of narcotics, that he knew the person to whom he is alleged to have made the sale for which he is on trial to be an undercover officer and had assisted him until asked to engage in an illegal act, after which the officer…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. People v. . MolineuxNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
  2. People v. VentimigliaNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
  3. People v. PavaoNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  4. People v. AllweissNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
  5. People v. SchwartzmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1969

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by101 opinions

  1. People v. AlvinoNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. People v. ElyNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  3. People v. RojasNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
  4. People v. KelseyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  5. People v. CrandallNew York Court of Appeals · 1987

96 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API