Legal Opinion

People v. Moore

New York Court of Appeals

Decided June 4, 1998PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

The Appellate Division correctly concluded that the trial court erred in permitting the prosecutor to cross-examine defendant about two prior crimes which the court’s earlier Sandoval ruling had previously disallowed (see, People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371). As the court below noted, defendant’s equivocal statements on cross-examination did not open the door to questions about those crimes, both of which involved knife-point robberies in Central Park (see, People v Fardan, 82 NY2d 638, 646). The exchange on…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. SandovalNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
  2. People v. FardanNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  3. People v. RodriguezNew York Court of Appeals · 1995

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. People v. PetersonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  2. People v. CooperNew York Court of Appeals · 1998
  3. People v. SnyderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
  4. People v. DugginsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
  5. People v. HendersonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API