People v. Aska
New York Court of Appeals
1DissentTitone, J.
The testimony of Delores Simms in this case was material, and the trial court abused its discretion in excluding it. Simms’s testimony would have gone to the heart of the People’s theory of defendant’s motive. Because a defendant is entitled to rebut the central premise of the People’s case, the trial court should have allowed Delores Simms to testify. I would reverse and order a new trial.
Although I would agree with the majority that the trial court, absent an abuse, is accorded wide discretion in making evidentiary rulings (see, People v Scarola, 71 NY2d 769, 777), the trial court’s…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- People v. SchwartzmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
- People v. HudyNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- People v. ScarolaNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- People v. CarterNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- People v. DaltonNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.