The court's modification of its Molineux ruling was proper. During his direct testimony, defendant opened the door to evidence about the reason that the victim owed him money when he testified that the debt had an innocuous origin. Accordingly, it was proper to permit the prosecution to establish that the debt resulted from the sale of marijuana, notwithstanding that the court had previously precluded such evidence (see People v Fardan,
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.