Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the trial court erred in precluding the testimony of a defense witness who would have explained the source of the money on the defendant's person at the time of his arrest. We disagree. It was the defense counsel who elicited testimony from the arresting officer regarding the money found on the defendant's person (cf., People v Scott,
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.