Legal Opinion

People v. Favor

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

Decided April 26, 1991PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant argues that the court erred in permitting the prosecutor to refer to unreliable chemical test results in his opening statement. We disagree. The court instructed the jury that the opening statements did not constitute evidence. The court also told the jury to disregard the chemist’s testimony about the testing procedures.

Defendant failed to preserve for review his contention that the court erred in conducting a Sandoval hearing (see, People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371) in his absence and, since defendant did not establish prejudice, we decline…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. SandovalNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
  2. People v. DunbarAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. People v. FavorNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. People v. AlexanderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  3. People v. LomackAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  4. People v. ColeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  5. People v. FavorNew York Court of Appeals · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API