Opinion
February 14, 1989
Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (O'Shaughnessey, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed.
The defendant contends that trial court erroneously restricted the cross-examination of his accomplice on the issue of his potential bias, effectively denying the defendant his constitutional right to confront a witness against him. We disagree. Our review of the record indicates that the accomplice was subjected to extensive cross-examination on this issue, including inquiry into the fact that he expected favorable treatment in his own case in exchange for his cooperation in testifying against the defendant (see, People v Cuevas, 138 A.D.2d 620, 622; People v Burke, 127 A.D.2d 842).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.