Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Matthew DAVIS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Peter J. Benitez, J.), rendered March 4, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defense counsel's request to cross-examine an undercover officer regarding a statement he made to the prosecutor during a recess in which the officer expressed his mistaken belief that one of the trial jurors had served on a prior case in which the officer had testified. Accordingly, the court's ruling imposed a reasonable limitation on cross-examination that did not deprive defendant of his right to confront witnesses or present a defense (see Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 678-679, 106 S.Ct. 1431, 89 L.Ed.2d 674 [1986] ).
The court properly permitted a second undercover officer involved in ongoing investigations to be identified only by her shield number, since concerns for her safety warranted maintaining her anonymity (see People v. Solares, 309 A.D.2d 502, 765 N.Y.S.2d 239 [2003], lv. denied 1 N.Y.3d 581, 775 N.Y.S.2d 797, 807 N.E.2d 910 [2003] ). The court's determination was made in accordance with the procedural requirements set forth in People v. Waver, 3 N.Y.3d 748, 750, 788 N.Y.S.2d 630, 821 N.E.2d 934 [2004].
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: April 21, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)