Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

PEOPLE v. MAYO

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Apr 11, 2005
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the trial court improperly curtailed his right of cross-examination is unpreserved for appellate review ( see People v. Lyons, 81 NY2d 753, 754; People v. Iannelli, 69 NY2d 684, 685, cert denied 482 US 914; People v. Odiot, 242 AD2d 308; People v. McEachern, 237 AD2d 381; People v. Dunbar, 145 AD2d 501). In any event, the trial court providently exercised its discretion in limiting the defendant's cross-examination of the eyewitness ( see People v. Odiot, supra; People v. McEachern, supra; People v. Daniels, 225 AD2d 632; People v. Delcarpio, 221 AD2d 359, 360; People v. Taylor, 214 AD2d 757).

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the defendant was afforded meaningful representation ( see People v. Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712-714; People v. Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 708-709; People v. Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 146-147).

The defendant's remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or do not warrant reversal.