PEOPLE v. DEALE (2006)

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard D. Carruthers, J.), rendered May 8, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and seventh degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of 4 1/212 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

 The court's Sandoval ruling balanced the appropriate factors and was a proper exercise of discretion (see People v. Hayes, 97 N.Y.2d 203, 738 N.Y.S.2d 663, 764 N.E.2d 963 [2002] ).   The court precluded inquiry into a substantial portion of defendant's extensive record.   While defendant challenges the court's decision to permit inquiry into his weapon conviction, that conviction was neither inflammatory nor similar to the crimes charged, and its probative value on the issue of credibility outweighed its prejudicial effect.

 After defendant's opening statement, in which he committed himself to an agency defense, the court properly granted the People's request for permission to elicit additional matter relating to defendant's history of drug trafficking.   This material was limited in scope and was relevant to rebut that defense (see e.g. People v. Seay, 176 A.D.2d 192, 193, 574 N.Y.S.2d 316 [1991], lv. denied 79 N.Y.2d 864, 580 N.Y.S.2d 736, 588 N.E.2d 771 [1992];  People v. Castaneda, 173 A.D.2d 349, 569 N.Y.S.2d 719 [1991], lv. denied 78 N.Y.2d 963, 574 N.Y.S.2d 943, 580 N.E.2d 415 [1991] ).   There is no merit to defendant's claim that he was unduly prejudiced by the timing of the People's application.