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. Robert WEINSTEIN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce Allen, J.), rendered August 5, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first and third degrees and harassment in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 2 to 6 years, 1 year, and a conditional discharge, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant was tried upon a proper indictment. The record, read as a whole, establishes that the People sought and were granted leave to amend the indictment by inserting the word “serious” before the phrase “physical injury” in regard to the charge of assault in the first degree, which had been omitted because of a typographical error. The court's Sandoval ruling properly weighed the probative value of defendant's prior bad acts against the potential for undue prejudice in permitting the People to cross-examine defendant concerning the facts surrounding his dismissal from two jobs for misconduct of a nature that would affect his credibility (see, People v. Sorge, 301 N.Y. 198, 93 N.E.2d 637).
The court properly exercised its discretion in closing the courtroom to defendant's brother, a separately prosecuted codefendant, during a readback of testimony. Under the unusual circumstances presented, there was a significant danger that the jury would have drawn inferences from the brother's sudden and unexplained appearance in court (see, People v. Rivera, 225 A.D.2d 360, 639 N.Y.S.2d 24, lv. denied 88 N.Y.2d 941, 647 N.Y.S.2d 174, 670 N.E.2d 458).
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: October 08, 1998
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)