Legal Opinion
People v. Smith
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided October 7, 1992PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant argues on appeal that reversal is required pursuant to People v Dokes (79 NY2d 656) because he was absent from the Sandoval hearing, even though he never objected to the Sandoval procedure. Although there apparently had been a preliminary determination in defendant’s absence that cross-examination regarding 10 prior bad acts and convictions would not be allowed and that cross-examination concerning 4 would be allowed, there was in fact a de novo hearing in defendant’s presence with respect to the latter 4, during which the District…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- People v. BaldiNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
- People v. DokesNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- People v. AlexanderNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- People v. EadyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- People v. AlexanderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
3Cited by10 opinions
- People v. BergerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- People v. LynchAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- People v. RussellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- People v. VargasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- People v. MooreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.