From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Mendoza

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 22, 1993
191 A.D.2d 648 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

March 22, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (McInerney, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

It is well settled that the trial court has broad discretion in restricting the scope of voir dire by counsel (see, People v Jean, 75 N.Y.2d 744; People v. Boulware, 29 N.Y.2d 135, 140, cert denied 405 U.S. 995). Contrary to the contention of the defendant, the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in permitting the prosecutor to ask a juror a series of questions designed to determine whether he could "sift through" the evidence and assess whether a person was being truthful. Indeed, we conclude that the jury selection process was fair. The defendant has wholly failed to demonstrate that the jurors chosen were anything but impartial (see, People v. Pepper, 59 N.Y.2d 353, 359).

We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245) or devoid of merit (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620; People v. Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86; CPL 470.15). Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Copertino and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Mendoza

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 22, 1993
191 A.D.2d 648 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

People v. Mendoza

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RAMON MENDOZA…

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

Date published: Mar 22, 1993

Citations

191 A.D.2d 648 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
595 N.Y.S.2d 113

Citing Cases

People v. Rodriguez

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.          It is well settled that the trial court has broad discretion…