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, etc., respondent, v. Steven MARSHALL, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Aiello, J.), rendered October 5, 1995, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, and grand larceny in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in curtailing cross-examination concerning the arrest record of a witness for the People and that of the witness's sons (see, People v. Miceli, 235 A.D.2d 551, 653 N.Y.S.2d 361; People v. Taylor, 214 A.D.2d 757, 625 N.Y.S.2d 637; People v. Almeida, 159 A.D.2d 508, 509, 552 N.Y.S.2d 377).
Furthermore, the court did not err in denying the defendant's request for a missing witness charge with regard to the daughter of the complainant. The complainant's daughter was a minor who, at the time of the defendant's request at trial, was residing in the Bahamas and unavailable to testify on behalf of the People (see, People v. Benjamin, 210 A.D.2d 418, 620 N.Y.S.2d 416; People v. Mancini, 207 A.D.2d 730, 616 N.Y.S.2d 613; People v. Ortega, 166 A.D.2d 728, 561 N.Y.S.2d 298). Moreover, the defendant was not prejudiced by the People's failure to call her. The child's testimony would have related only to counts of the indictment which were not submitted to the jury.
The remaining contention raised by the defendant in his supplemental pro se brief does not provide a basis for reversal.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: February 01, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)