From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Miles

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 24, 1992
182 A.D.2d 1113 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

April 24, 1992

Appeal from the Monroe County Court, Marks, J.

Present — Denman, P.J., Green, Balio, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted of intentional assault in the first degree (Penal Law § 120.10) and unlawful imprisonment in the first degree (Penal Law § 135.10). On appeal defendant contends that the trial court erred in refusing his request that reckless assault in the third degree be charged to the jury as a lesser included offense of intentional assault in the first degree and that the trial court improperly allowed the prosecution to cross-examine a defense witness concerning her prior testimony at a hearing. Both contentions lack merit. There was no reasonable view of the evidence, considered in the light most favorable to defendant (see, People v Martin, 59 N.Y.2d 704, 705), that would support a finding that defendant acted recklessly but not intentionally. Further, it is settled law that the bias and credibility of a witness and evidence destructive of an alibi are proper subjects of cross-examination (see, People v McDowell, 9 N.Y.2d 12; People v Knox, 71 A.D.2d 41, 49). Here, the trial court properly restricted the nature of the prosecutor's examination to preclude any suggestion that the prior testimony was given on an unrelated matter, thereby avoiding any prejudice to defendant by such examination.


Summaries of

People v. Miles

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 24, 1992
182 A.D.2d 1113 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. Miles

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. WARN ULYSSES MILES…

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

Date published: Apr 24, 1992

Citations

182 A.D.2d 1113 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Citing Cases

People v. Brendan

We also conclude that the verdict is not contrary to the weight of the evidence (see, People v. Bleakley, 69…