People v. Skinner
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that he was deprived of a fair trial when he was cross-examined regarding a prior statement because the prosecutor failed to comply with CPL 710.30 and County Court had precluded the People from introducing the statement in their direct case. Defendant failed to preserve his contention for our review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]), and, in any event, no CPL 710.30 notice was required because the statement was used only for impeachment purposes (see, People v Sanzotta, 191 AD2d 1032).
There is no merit to the contention of defendant that he…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- People v. DuncanNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- People v. InnissNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- People v. RussellNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
- People v. HickmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- People v. SanzottaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. YoungAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- People v. HillAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- People v. SingletaryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- People v. McCulloughAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- People v. RolandAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.