Opinion
July 21, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Miller, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court's Sandoval ruling permitting the prosecutor to inquire into the acts underlying two pending felony indictments against the defendant, as well as several prior misdemeanor convictions (see, People v Pavao, 59 N.Y.2d 282; People v Agro, 96 A.D.2d 908). It is well settled that the extent of cross-examination bearing on the credibility of a witness "is discretionary with the trial court, and its rulings are not subject to review, unless it clearly appears that the discretion has been abused" (People v Duffy, 36 N.Y.2d 258, 262-263, cert denied 423 U.S. 861; People v Schwartzman, 24 N.Y.2d 241, 244, cert denied 396 U.S. 846; People v Bennette, 56 N.Y.2d 142). Mangano, J.P., Gibbons, Bracken and Spatt, JJ., concur.