v.

ANTHONY WOODS, Appellant.

Submitted By: Brian Seth Drier (counsel for the appellant); Leonard B. Chipkin (counsel for the respondent)

Judgment Affirmed: Andrew J. DiPaola, P.J.; Patricia D. Collins & Angelo J. Ingrassia, JJ.

DECISION OF THE COURT

<SM-1>

Appeal by defendant for a judgment of the District Court, Nassau (Feuerstein, J. Jury trial) rendered on December 20, 1998 convicting him of petit larceny and imposing sentence.

Judgment of conviction affirmed.

It was not error for the court to permit cross-examination of defendant as to three prior convictions for attempted petit larceny and petit larceny. Notwithstanding the risk of possible prejudice, proof of prior crimes of individual dishonesty are admissible on the trial of another similar charge. Such crimes are directly probative of defendant's credibility since they involve acts of individual dishonesty and untrustworthiness (People v. Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371; People v. Johnson, 122 AD2d 812). <SM-2>

Inasmuch as defendant did not object to the court's charge to the jury, the issues raised have not been preserved for appellate review (People v. Autry, 75 NY2d 836). In any event, the court's instructions to the jury concerning defendant's failure to testify and flight were adequate to convey the appropriate standards to the jury (see, People v. Adams, 69 NY2d 805; People v. Yazum, 13 NY2d 302). In view of the court's repeated instruction to the jury that the information was nothing more than an accusation without evidentiary value, no error was committed by permitting the prosecutor to read during the opening statement the factual portion of the accusatory instrument. The case of People v. Macy's (121 Misc 2d 311) cited by defendant is not in point since no curative instructions were given in that case.

All concur.

__