From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Harrison

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 3, 1989
149 A.D.2d 434 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

April 3, 1989

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feldman, J.).


Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The defendant contends that his right to remain silent was abrogated during the trial under indictment No. 2216/86 when the prosecutor asked him why he did not tell a police officer that the complainant had slapped him. As no objection was raised to this question at trial, the issue was not preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05). In any event, the defendant's contention is without merit. Ordinarily a defendant's pretrial silence cannot be used for impeachment purposes (see, People v Conyers, 52 N.Y.2d 454, 459). However, when a defendant speaks to police and omits exculpatory material that he presents for the first time at trial, he may be impeached with that omission (see, People v. Savage, 50 N.Y.2d 673, 679, cert denied 449 U.S. 1016; see also, People v. Myrie, 137 A.D.2d 563, 564; People v. Goss, 136 A.D.2d 653, 654).

We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J.P., Lawrence, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Harrison

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 3, 1989
149 A.D.2d 434 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

People v. Harrison

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DAVID HARRISON…

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

Date published: Apr 3, 1989

Citations

149 A.D.2d 434 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
539 N.Y.S.2d 779

Citing Cases

People v. West

Generally, a defendant's post-arrest silence cannot be used for impeachment purposes (see, People v Conyers,…

People v. Trigger

Further, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in rendering its Sandoval ruling (see,…