People v. Sul
| Decision Date | 23 December 1996 |
| Citation | 652 N.Y.S.2d 57,234 A.D.2d 563 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Heung K. SUL, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Laurie S. Hershey, Garden City, (Anthony La Pinta, of counsel), for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, (John M. Castellano, Linda Cantoni and Arthur J. Burke, of counsel), for respondent.
Before COPERTINO, J.P., and JOY, KRAUSMAN and McGINITY, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Clabby, J.), rendered December 20, 1995, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree (two counts), burglary in the first degree (two counts), and unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's assertions, the trial court did not err by restricting the cross examination of prosecution witnesses regarding their motive to falsify. The trial court has broad discretion to limit cross examination when questions are repetitive, irrelevant or only marginally relevant, concern collateral issues, or threaten to mislead the jury (see, Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 679, 106 S.Ct. 1431, 1435, 89 L.Ed.2d 674; People v. McGriff, 201 A.D.2d 672, 673, 607 N.Y.S.2d 980). The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion here.
Nor did the trial court err in refusing to charge the jury that the alleged fortune-telling...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Caldwell
...239;People v. Castellanos, 65 A.D.3d 555, 556, 884 N.Y.S.2d 126;People v. Goodman, 280 A.D.2d 611, 720 N.Y.S.2d 534;People v. Heung K. Sul, 234 A.D.2d 563, 652 N.Y.S.2d 57;People v. Ashner, 190 A.D.2d 238, 597 N.Y.S.2d 975). The defendant's contention that the prosecutor committed prosecuto......
-
People v. Sul
...744 656 N.Y.S.2d 744 89 N.Y.2d 986, 678 N.E.2d 1360 People v. Heung K. Sul Court of Appeals of New York Feb 18, 1997 Smith, J. 234 A.D.2d 563, 652 N.Y.S.2d 57 App.Div. 2, Queens Denied. ...
-
Repetitive Questions
...far beyond the scope of the hearing and becomes repetitive, precluding such questions is not an abuse of discretion. See People v. Sul , 652 N.Y.S.2d 57 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept. 1996) and People v. Johnson , 568 N.Y.S.2d 611 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept. 1991). The trial court did not abuse its discretion in ......
-
Repetitive Questions
...far beyond the scope of the hearing and becomes repetitive, precluding such questions is not an abuse of discretion. See People v. Sul , 652 N.Y.S.2d 57 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept. 1996) and People v. Johnson , 568 N.Y.S.2d 611 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept. 1991). The trial court did not abuse its discretion in ......
-
Repetitive questions
...far beyond the scope of the hearing and becomes repetitive, precluding such questions is not an abuse of discretion. See People v. Sul , 652 N.Y.S.2d 57 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept. 1996) and People v. Johnson , 568 N.Y.S.2d 611 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept. 1991). The trial court did not abuse its discretion in ......
-
Table of Cases
...People v. Stamper , 480 Mich. 1, 742 N.W.2d 607 (2007), §5.407 People v. Stiles, 692 P.2d 1124 (Colo. App. 1984), §5.405 People v. Sul, 652 N.Y.S.2d 57 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept. 1996), §10.500 People v. Sykes , 972 N.E.2d 1272 (Ill.App., 2012), §§11.400, 36.301, 44.400 People v. Tarsia, 67 A.D.2d 2......