People v. Gonzalez
| Decision Date | 29 June 1987 |
| Citation | 517 N.Y.S.2d 530,131 A.D.2d 873 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Victor GONZALEZ, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Philip L. Weinstein, New York City (Alan S. Axelrod, of counsel), for appellant.
John J. Santucci, Dist. Atty., Kew Gardens (Felix M. Hester, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MANGANO, J.P., and NIEHOFF, KOOPER and SPATT, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Linakis, J.), rendered November 12, 1985, convicting him of attempted rape in the first degree and sexual abuse in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The rule with respect to prompt outcry in cases of forcible rape is that the complaint of injury should be made promptly or at the first suitable opportunity by the injured woman and can be testified to by either the complainant or by any witness who heard her make such complaint (see, Richardson, Evidence § 292 People v. O'Sullivan, 104 N.Y. 481, 10 N.E. 880; Baccio v. People, 41 N.Y. 265; People v. Gomez, 112 A.D.2d 445, 492 N.Y.S.2d 415, lv. denied 66 N.Y.2d 919, 498 N.Y.S.2d 1034, 489 N.E.2d 779). In the instant case, the trial court properly admitted evidence of the statement made by the complainant to her neighbor on the day following the alleged sexual assault.
Moreover, we reject the defendant's claim that the trial court unduly restricted his recross-examination of the complaining witness. While it is true that cross-examination is an essential component of the constitutional right of an accused to confront the witnesses against him (see, Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308, 94 S.Ct. 1105, 39 L.Ed.2d 347; People v. Bethune, 105 A.D.2d 262, 484 N.Y.S.2d 577), and while this court has held that, in a criminal case, a party may prove through cross-examination any relevant proposition, irrespective of the scope of direct examination (see, People v. Kennedy, 70 A.D.2d 181, 420 N.Y.S.2d 23), it is well settled that once the parties have proceeded to redirect and recross-examination, inquiry as of right is limited to new matters brought out on the preceding examination, and the scope of examination otherwise rests within the sound discretion of the trial court (see, People v. Melendez, 55 N.Y.2d 445, 449 N.Y.S.2d 946, 434 N.E.2d 1324; People v. Bethune, supra ).
We find that the sentence imposed upon the defendant was not excessive (see, People v. Semkus, 109 A.D.2d 902, 486 N.Y.S.2d 793, on remand 122 A.D.2d 287, 505 N.Y.S.2d 191; lv. denied 68 N.Y.2d 1004, 510 N.Y.S.2d 1037, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Drach
...in limiting re-cross-examination of a police witness (see People v. Maddery, 282 A.D.2d 761, 761, 724 N.Y.S.2d 346 ; People v. Gonzalez, 131 A.D.2d 873, 874, 517 N.Y.S.2d 530 ). Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court's Sandoval ruling (see People v. Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 37......
-
People v. Holland
...139 A.D.2d 668, 527 N.Y.S.2d 799, app. denied 72 N.Y.2d 862, 532 N.Y.S.2d 512, 528 N.E.2d 902), to the neighbor (see People v. Gonzalez, 131 A.D.2d 873, 517 N.Y.S.2d 530, app. denied 70 N.Y.2d 800, 522 N.Y.S.2d 117, 516 N.E.2d 1230) as well as to the detective at the hospital (see People v.......
-
People v. Lopez
...104 N.Y. 481, 10 N.E. 880; Baccio v. People, 41 N.Y. 265; People v. Lombardi, 139 A.D.2d 767, 527 N.Y.S.2d 801; People v. Gonzalez, 131 A.D.2d 873, 517 N.Y.S.2d 530). This error, however, was harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt. There was no significant pr......
-
People v. Allen
...People v. Cummings, 109 A.D.2d 748, 485 N.Y.S.2d 847; see also, People v. Ranieri, 144 A.D.2d 1006, 534 N.Y.S.2d 287; People v. Gonzalez, 131 A.D.2d 873, 517 N.Y.S.2d 530). However, owing to the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt, the admission of the mother's testimony as to wh......