People v. Matos
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the prosecutor’s request to reopen his direct case to offer evidence from a codefendant. The decision to reopen a case during trial lies within the sound discretion of the trial court (see, People v Ventura, 35 NY2d 654; People v Dixon, 147 AD2d 769, 773). Further, the trial court did not err in denying defendant’s request to instruct the jury on the affirmative defense of entrapment (see, Penal Law § 40.05). Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to defendant (see, People v Butts, 72 NY2d 746, 750), we conclude that the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- People v. ButtsNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- People v. DeGinaNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- People v. VenturaNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- People v. ThompsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- People v. DixonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
3Cited by4 opinions
- People v. McCulloughAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- People v. ChaudhryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- MCCULLOUGH, JAMELL R., PEOPLE vAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- People v. McCulloughAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015