People v. Coleman

• Citation: 438 N.Y.S.2d 882,81 A.D.2d 869
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Alfred Michael COLEMAN, Appellant.
• Decision Date: 11 May 1981
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 882

438 N.Y.S.2d 882

81 A.D.2d 869

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Alfred Michael COLEMAN, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division,

Second Department.

May 11, 1981.

Boxer, Gerst & Morse, Garden City (Jonathan N. Boxer, Garden City, of counsel), for appellant.

Patrick Henry, Dist. Atty., Riverhead (Charles M. Newell, Riverhead, of counsel), for respondent.

Before MOLLEN, P. J., and HOPKINS, DAMIANI and TITONE, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered June 23, 1978, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Appellant raises the issue, for the first time on appeal, that the police, without consent or a search warrant, entered upon a privately owned unfenced railroad siding, used by appellant for the storage of railroad cars, in order to examine a Hobart generator which had been standing outdoors on the property in full view of passers-by. Since CPL 710.60 requires all grounds upon which suppression of evidence is urged to be set forth in the moving papers, this issue is not preserved for review on appeal. (See People v. Tutt, 38 N.Y.2d 1011, 384 N.Y.S.2d 444, 348 N.E.2d 920.)

Appellant urges as a second ground for reversal that it was error to cross-examine him regarding his having published pamphlets which instructed people as to how to cheat the telephone company by using slugs, etc., and how to buy goods without paying sales tax. "defendant who chooses to testify may be cross-examined concerning any immoral, vicious or criminal acts of his life which have a bearing on his credibility as a witness, provided the cross-examiner questions in good faith and upon a reasonable basis in fact" (People v. Greer, 42 N.Y.2d 170, 176, 397 N.Y.S.2d 613, 366 N.E.2d 273; People v. Sorge, 301 N.Y. 198, 93 N.E.2d 637). On the facts of this case, the publishing of books or pamphlets, an activity protected under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, should not be categorized as an "immoral act" under this rule. It was similarly error to admit the pamphlets into evidence as "of extrinsic documentary material on a matter collateral to the trial issues, solely for the purpose of impeaching a defendant's credibility, is improper" (People v. LaRue, 47 A.D.2d 649, 366 N.Y.S.2d 966; People v. Schwartzman, 24 N.Y.2d 241, 299 N.Y.S.2d 817, 247 N.E.2d 642, cert. den. 396 U.S. 846, 90 S.Ct. 103,...