Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in ruling that the prosecutor would be permitted to question the defendant as to the underlying facts of his prior felony narcotics conviction. The court also properly ruled that the prosecutor could question the defendant about the underlying facts of four of his prior misdemeanor convictions, three of which were for criminal sale of marihuana, the other of which was for...
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.