Legal Opinion

People v. Lee

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

Decided November 29, 2011PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The court’s Sandoval ruling balanced the appropriate factors and was a proper exercise of discretion (see People v Hayes, 97 NY2d 203 [2002]; People v Walker, 83 NY2d 455, 458-459 [1994]). The court precluded any inquiry into more than half of the numerous prior bad acts identified by the People. In those instances where the court permitted inquiry into a conviction, it generally precluded inquiry into the underlying facts. The probative value of defendant’s extensive theft-related convictions outweighed their prejudicial effect.

The fact that one of the victims testified through a Cantonese *634in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. WalkerNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
  2. People v. HayesNew York Court of Appeals · 2002
  3. In re James L.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. LeeNew York Court of Appeals · 2013
  2. People v. ChinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
  3. People v. ChinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
  4. Zhiwen Yang v. HarmonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API