Opinion
December 19, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Bergin, J.
Present — Callahan, J.P., Doerr, Green, Lawton and Schnepp, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We find no merit to any of the claims raised by defendant on this appeal. The suppression court properly relied upon People v. Beam ( 57 N.Y.2d 241) in concluding that defendant's written statement would be admissible in evidence (see, People v. Williams, 91 A.D.2d 1173). Moreover, the People never used the written statement as part of their direct case. The statement was merely marked for identification during cross-examination of defendant. Also, we conclude that the limitation imposed on both counsel during the voir dire of prospective jurors did not violate defendant's due process rights. The trial court necessarily has broad discretion to control and restrict the scope of the voir dire examination (see, People v. Boulware, 29 N.Y.2d 135, cert denied 405 U.S. 995; People v. Corbett, 68 A.D.2d 772, affd 52 N.Y.2d 714; People v Lucks, 83 A.D.2d 516). It is clear from the record that defense counsel was accorded a fair opportunity to question prospective jurors.