Majority
Defendant’s contention to the contrary notwithstanding, the hearing court did not err in determining that suppression of the items which the police officer seized from his automobile was not warranted (People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759 ). Under the facts of this case, People v Class ( 63 NY2d 491 , cert granted _ US _, 53 USLW 3702 ) is not a holding to the contrary.
Defendant’s contention that the trial court abused its discretion in restricting defense counsel’s examination of prospective jurors is without merit (see, People v Pepper, 59 NY2d 353 , 358-359; People v Boulware, 29 NY2d 135 ).
Finally, defendant’s Sandoval contention lacks merit and, in any event, if any error was committed, it was harmless. Titone, J. P., Lazer, Thompson and Rubin, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Class 63 NY2d 491 p. 905
- People v. Pepper 59 NY2d 353 at 358-359 p. 905
- People v. Boulware 29 NY2d 135 p. 905