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. Rashan A. Hay, appellant.
Submitted-April 30, 2010
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Sullivan, J.), rendered August 1, 2006, convicting him of attempted assault in the first degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the trial court improperly permitted rebuttal testimony to impeach his credibility on a collateral issue is not preserved for appellate review (see People v. Broadus, 8 AD3d 398; People v. Jeffries, 278 A.D.2d 431; People v. Maldonado, 212 A.D.2d 808). The general objections raised by defense counsel were insufficient to preserve the specific contention now raised on appeal (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10; People v. Osuna, 65 N.Y.2d 822, 824). In any event, the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in permitting the rebuttal testimony (see CPL 260.30[7]; People v. Harris, 57 N.Y.2d 335, cert. denied 460 U.S. 1047; People v. Grindley, 243 A.D.2d 580).
The defendant's contention that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury that it could only consider the defendant's prior conviction for the purpose of evaluating his credibility and not as proof that he had committed the crime for which he was on trial is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Willis, 69 AD3d 966). “Moreover, the trial court was under no obligation to give the charge, sua sponte, under the circumstances of this case” (People v. Moore, 66 AD3d 707, 710).
In any event, any error resulting from the alleged failure was harmless, as there was overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt, and no significant probability that the error contributed to his convictions (see People v. Willis, 69 AD3d at 966; People v. Giuca, 58 AD3d 750).
DILLON, J.P., SANTUCCI, HALL and LOTT, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of 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.
Docket No: 2006-08299 (Ind.No. 5816 /05)
Decided: May 18, 2010
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)