People v. Carmack
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the CourtSimons, J.
Defendant has been convicted of criminally selling a controlled substance (heroin), to an undercover agent of the Erie County Sheriff’s Department. A new trial is required because the prosecutor improperly cross-examined defendant during the trial about his prior drug conviction and other drug-related incidents.
Prior to trial defendant moved for a Sandoval hearing (People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371). At the conclusion of that hearing the court ruled that if defendant testified, the District Attorney might question him about the underlying facts of (1) a 1971 charge of criminal possession of a…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- People v. SandovalNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- People v. SchwartzmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
- People v. DuffyNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- People v. McKinneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
- Schwartzman v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- People v. AlvinoNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- People v. LewisNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- People v. RahmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
- People v. McGeeNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- People v. AndersonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.