From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Barnes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 6, 1993
199 A.D.2d 274 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

December 6, 1993

Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Thorp, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, prejudicial error was not committed by the trial court's curtailment of the cross examination of the People's witness by defense counsel (see, People v Ashner, 190 A.D.2d 238). In any event, any alleged error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 241-242).

Contrary to the defendant's contention, expert testimony regarding the market price of the cocaine was properly admitted to help the jury understand the drug transaction for which the defendant was arrested. It is within a trial court's discretion to permit certain expert testimony when it determines that such testimony will aid the jurors in reaching a resolution on the facts of the case (see, People v Cronin, 60 N.Y.2d 430).

The defendant's contention that the sentence was excessive is without merit (see, People v Pena, 50 N.Y.2d 400, cert denied 449 U.S. 1087). Thompson, J.P., Bracken, Balletta and Joy, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Barnes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 6, 1993
199 A.D.2d 274 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

People v. Barnes

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ALFRED BARNES…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 6, 1993

Citations

199 A.D.2d 274 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
604 N.Y.S.2d 218

Citing Cases

People v. West

In any event, the defendant opened the door to this line of inquiry, as he had presented himself on direct…

Allen v. Artus

The trial court has the discretion to decide whether expert testimony is needed to help jurors understand the…