People v. Steffens
Decision Date | 14 February 1961 |
Citation | 12 A.D.2d 962,211 N.Y.S.2d 249 |
Parties | PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Warren STEFFENS, alias Warren Louis Steffens, Appellant. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Anthony F. Marra, New York City, for appellant; Stephen E. O'Neil, New York City, of counsel.
Frank D. O'Connor, Dist. Atty., Long Island City, for respondent; Morton Greenspan, New York City, of counsel.
Before NOLAN, P. J., and UGHETTA, KLEINFELD, CHRIST and PETTE, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Queens County, rendered March 2, 1959, convicting him, after a jury trial, of grand alrceny in the second degree, and sentencing him to serve a term of two and one-half to ten years. Defendant also appeals from every intermediate order made in the action.
Defendant and one Ellis were charged with burglary in the third degree, grand larceny in the first degree and possession of burglar's instruments as a felony; the indictment alleging in substance that defendant and Ellis, acting in concert, broke and entered a described building and stole certain property therefrom. At the opening of the trial the indictment was severed as to Ellis, and the trial proceeded against defendant alone.
At the end of the People's case, the trial court, without objection, reduced the second count from grand larceny in the first degree to grand larceny in the second degree. The jury found defendant guilty on that count, and not guilty on the counts charging burglary and possession of burglar's instruments.
Judgment affirmed.
Ellis, called as a witness by the People, first testified that defendant was not implicated in the crime. Thereafter, the prosecutor was properly permitted to attempt to impeach such testimony by showing that Ellis had made prior statements to an Assistant District Attorney and others in which he admitted his own guilt and inculpated defendant. Cf. People v. Ferraro, 293 N.Y. 51, 56, 55 N.E.2d 861, 863; People v. Purtell, 243 N.Y. 273, 280, 153 N.E. 72, 74; People v. Portese, 279 App.Div. 63, 65, 108 N.Y.S.2d 471, 472. Ellis then testified that those portions of his earlier statement to the Assistant District Attorney, in which he implicated defendant, were untrue.
The following day, over defendant's objections, and after the People had announced that they had no further questions to ask Ellis, the prosecutor was allowed to continue his examination of Ellis, who then recanted his previous testimony, said his prior statement to the Assistant District Attorney was true, and testified that defendant was with him at the time of the commission of the crime and shared in its proceeds.
We find no abuse of discretion by the trial court in thus permitting the examination of Ellis to be continued by the People. Cf. Blake v. People, 73 N.Y. 586, 587; People v. Simmons, 125 App.Div. 234, 241, 109 N.Y.S. 190, 196; 3 Wharton's Criminal Evidence [11th ed.], § 1266.
We are also of the opinion that, on the record presented, the omission to instruct the jury that Ellis' prior statement could be considered only on the question of his...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Dercole
...continued uninterruptedly (see People v. Torres, 5 A.D.2d 134, 170 N.Y.S.2d 104, affd. 5 N.Y.2d 804, 181 N.Y.S.2d 202; People v. Steffens, 12 A.D.2d 962, 211 N.Y.S.2d 249; People ex rel. Troiani v. Fay, 13 A.D.2d 999, 216 N.Y.S.2d 394, mot. for lv. to app. den. 10 N.Y.2d 707, 221 N.Y.S.2d 1......
-
People v. Williams
...the verdict. Since the defendant did not except or object, such issue was not preserved for appellate review (see People v. Steffens, 12 A.D.2d 962, 963, 211 N.Y.S.2d 249, 251; People v. Sciascia, 268 App.Div. 14, 15, 48 N.Y.S.2d 428, 429, affd. 294 N.Y. 927, 63 N.E.2d 118). However, since ......
-
People v. Pratts
...on the law and defendant did not object to it (see People v. Williams, 47 A.D.2d 262, 366 N.Y.S.2d 894, Supra; People v. Steffens, 12 A.D.2d 962, 963, 211 N.Y.S.2d 249, 250). LATHAM, Acting P.J., and CHRIST and MUNDER, JJ., MARGETT, J., dissents and votes to reverse the judgment and dismiss......
-
People v. Delorio
...the court's charge that defendant could be found guilty of robbery in the first degree and not guilty of murder (People v. Steffens, 12 A.D.2d 962, 963, 211 N.Y.S.2d 249, 250; People v. Sciascia, 268 App.Div. 14, 48 N.Y.S.2d 428, affd. 294 N.Y. 927, 63 N.E.2d 118). The evidence amply sustai......