People v. Nieves

Thompson, J. P.,

dissents and votes to affirm the judgment, with the following memorandum: Although I agree with my colleagues that the court improvidently exercised its discretion in permitting the prosecutor to inquire into the defendant’s psychiatric history, I nevertheless conclude that, on the record before us, there was no significant probability that had that evidence been excluded, the jury would have acquitted the defendant (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 236; see also, People v Reddick, 65 NY2d 835; People v Gannaway, 170 AD2d 529). The record reveals that the defendant—who had…