Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention to the contrary notwithstanding, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion when ruling that the prosecutor could cross-examine the defendant about the facts underlying his prior convictions for theft-related offenses rather than restricting inquiry to the mere fact of their existence. Those convictions, which were dissimilar to the crimes for which the defendant was then being...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
