The court properly exercised its discretion in precluding, as unduly speculative, evidence of a supposed pattern of robberies in the area of the instant robbery, allegedly committed by a single, unidentified robber not meeting defendant's description, since there was nothing linking the other robberies with the instant robbery, and nothing to indicate that the hypothetical "pattern" robber committed it (see People v Primo,
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.