People v. Yelder, 1

• Decision Date: 31 May 1996
• Docket Number: No. 1,1
• Citation: 643 N.Y.S.2d 850,227 A.D.2d 953
• Parties: PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Timothy YELDER, Appellant. (Appeal)
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 850

643 N.Y.S.2d 850

227 A.D.2d 953

PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Timothy YELDER, Appellant. (Appeal No. 1.)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

May 31, 1996.

Edward J. Nowak by Kathleen McDonough, Rochester, for Appellant.

Howard R. Relin by Loretta Courtney, Rochester, for Respondent.

Before GREEN, J.P., and PINE, LAWTON, BALIO and BOEHM, JJ.

MEMORANDUM:

Defendant contends that County Court erred in admitting testimony that, on the day following the assault, the complainant told other witnesses that defendant had beaten her and that she was afraid of him. Because the evidence of guilt is overwhelming and there is no significant probability that defendant otherwise would have been acquitted, any error in admitting that testimony is harmless (see, People v. Wheaton, 148 A.D.2d 931, 932, 539 N.Y.S.2d 169, lv. denied 74 N.Y.2d 853, 546 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 546 N.E.2d 201).

We reject defendant's further contention that the court erred in restricting defense counsel's cross-examination of the complainant. "It is firmly established that the degree of control to be exercised over the nature and extent of cross-examination is a matter addressed to the sound and broad discretion of the trial court" (People v. Anderson, 168 A.D.2d 624, 563 N.Y.S.2d 463, lv. denied 77 N.Y.2d 903, 569 N.Y.S.2d 935, 572 N.E.2d 618). The complainant admitted that she had used marihuana and cocaine on the day of the crime. The court did not abuse its discretion in precluding further cross-examination with respect to her past cocaine use (see, People v. Melcherts, 225 A.D.2d 357, 639 N.Y.S.2d 19; People v. Keel, 201 A.D.2d 960, 607 N.Y.S.2d 827, lv. denied 83 N.Y.2d 873, 613 N.Y.S.2d 133, 635 N.E.2d 302; People v. Washpon, 134 A.D.2d 384, 385, 520 N.Y.S.2d 862, lv. denied 73 N.Y.2d 791, 536 N.Y.S.2d 751, 533 N.E.2d 681).

Judgment unanimously affirmed.