From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Scarpulla

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 7, 1997
238 A.D.2d 359 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

April 7, 1997


Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Kuffner, J.), rendered April 28, 1995, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant's application to preclude cross-examination of him with respect to the acts underlying several prior convictions. The court, in limiting inquiry with respect to certain convictions while allowing full inquiry with regard to other convictions, demonstrated sensitivity to the balance between the probative value of the defendant's prior crimes upon his credibility and the possible prejudice to the defendant ( see, People v. Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371, 375; People v. Walker, 83 N.Y.2d 455, 459). "That the number of prior convictions ruled admissible was large" does not establish that the court improvidently exercised its discretion since there are no per se rules requiring preclusion because of the number of the prior crimes ( see, People v. Walker, supra, at 459). Mangano, P.J., O'Brien, Thompson and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Scarpulla

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 7, 1997
238 A.D.2d 359 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. Scarpulla

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOSEPH SCARPULLA…

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

Date published: Apr 7, 1997

Citations

238 A.D.2d 359 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
656 N.Y.S.2d 55

Citing Cases

People v. Ramos

The defendant's contention that the verdict of guilt of assault in the second degree under Penal Law §…

People v. N.Y

Furthermore, the defendant's challenge to the trial court's Sandoval ruling ( see People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d…