From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Alford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 2, 1991
178 A.D.2d 418 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

December 2, 1991

Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Winick, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant John Alford's contention, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in ruling that, should he testify, the People could cross-examine him as to a 1986 conviction for attempted robbery in the second degree and as to the underlying facts only of a 1985 youthful offender adjudication for attempted robbery in the first degree. Because they involved theft, the prior crimes were highly probative of the defendant's credibility (see, People v Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Kunzeman, J.P., Eiber, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Alford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 2, 1991
178 A.D.2d 418 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Alford

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOHN E. ALFORD…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 2, 1991

Citations

178 A.D.2d 418 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Citing Cases

People v. Preyer

Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the Supreme Court permissibly exercised its discretion in ruling…

People v. Foncette

ontention, the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in ruling that, should the defendant…