Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
We reject the defendant's contention that the Supreme Court's Sandoval ruling was an improvident exercise of the court's discretion because it permitted the prosecutor to cross examine the defendant, if he testified, about his prior robbery conviction (see, People v Rahman,
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.