Legal Opinion
People v. Burgin
New York Court of Appeals
Decided November 18, 1976PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
In view of the extensive cross-examination conducted by defense counsel, the District Attorney’s redirect did not consti*954tute improper bolstering but rather a permissible form of rehabilitation (see People v Baker, 23 NY2d 307, 322-323; People v Gallo, 12 NY2d 12, 15; Richardson, Evidence [10th ed], § 523, p 515).
We further note that the accomplice McKinney’s testimony was amply corroborated by the two statements defendant gave to the police. The admissions therein that he was in the company of other participants in the crime…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- People v. DanielsNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- People v. BakerNew York Court of Appeals · 1968
- People v. GalloNew York Court of Appeals · 1962
- People v. WassermanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1974
- People v. GioiaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1955
3Cited by39 opinions
- People v. GoldfeldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1977
- People v. CuevasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- People v. FarruggiaNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- People v. AcevedoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- People v. MondayAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.