From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Padilla

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 20, 2006
28 A.D.3d 365 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

8321, 8321A.

April 20, 2006.

Judgments, Supreme Court, New York County (Lewis Bart Stone, J.), rendered June 28, 2004, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of assault in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to consecutive terms of 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Lisa Lewis of counsel), for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Martin J. Foncello of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Saxe, J.P., Nardelli, Williams, Catterson and Malone, JJ.


The court properly exercised its discretion in precluding defendant from cross-examining a witness about his sealed arrest record. Defendant was unable to establish a good faith basis for questioning the witness since the facts surrounding the arrest were not revealed and it was not even known if they involved any "bad act[s]" ( see People v. Francis, 15 AD3d 318, lv denied 4 NY3d 853; People v. Antonetty, 268 AD2d 254, lv denied 94 NY2d 945). Defendant's argument that the arrest may have resulted in a disposition of a type permitting the underlying facts to be used for impeachment, such as a youthful offender adjudication or an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal ( see People v. Gray, 84 NY2d 709, 712; People v. Vidal, 26 NY2d 249), is based upon speculation. It is equally possible that the sealed record stemmed from a verdict of acquittal or a dismissal on the merits, which would have negated any good faith basis for inquiring into the underlying facts ( see People v. Plaisted, 2 AD3d 906, 908, lv denied 2 NY3d 744). The court was not required to unseal the witness's arrest record in the absence of a showing by defendant that any information in the record would have demonstrated the witness's bias in favor of the prosecution or hostility to defendant ( see People v. Acevedo, 176 AD2d 886, lv denied 79 NY2d 823). The court's ruling did not impair defendant's right to confront the witness ( see Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 US 673, 678-679).


Summaries of

People v. Padilla

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 20, 2006
28 A.D.3d 365 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

People v. Padilla

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ALEXIS PADILLA…

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

Date published: Apr 20, 2006

Citations

28 A.D.3d 365 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 3003
812 N.Y.S.2d 530

Citing Cases

People v. Montgomery

It has been held that an acquittal in a court proceeding, or a dismissal of a judicial proceeding on the…

People v. Moco

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ann M. Donnelly, J.), rendered October 16, 2015, convicting…