People v. Brockenshire
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was not deprived of a fundamental right because a Sandoval hearing was not conducted before he testified before the Grand Jury or because defense counsel and the prosecutor stipulated, in his absence, to the admissibility of defendant’s past convictions. The holding in People v Sandoval (34 NY2d 371) has not been extended to Grand Jury proceedings (see, People v Thomas, 213 AD2d 73, 78-79, affd 88 NY2d 821; see also, People v Jones, 239 AD2d 234; People v Hawkins, 216 AD2d 414, 415, lv denied 86 NY2d 842).
County Court did not abuse its…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- People v. SandovalNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- People v. RiveraNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- People v. GallowayNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
- People v. SawyerNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Meiselman v. Crown Heights Hospital, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1941
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- People v. SouthAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- People v. HamiltonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- People v. KreutterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. IveryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- HAMILTON, ADAM J., PEOPLE vAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.