PEOPLE v. ROBINSON

Although the court's participation in examining witnesses was extensive, it was within reasonable bounds and did not deprive defendant of a fair trial. The court did not take on either the function or appearance of an advocate ( see People v. Arnold, 98 N.Y.2d 63, 67; People v. Yut Wai Tom, 53 N.Y.2d 44).

The court properly exercised its discretion in imposing fair restrictions on cross-examination, primarily involving matters of form rather than substance, that did not interfere with defendant's defense ( see Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 678-679).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.