People v. Alovic

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Alovic

68 A.D.2d 928, 414 N.Y.S.2d 369, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11187

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 19, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 68 A.D.2d 928 (People v. Alovic) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Alovic, 68 A.D.2d 928, 414 N.Y.S.2d 369, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11187 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered October 20, 1977, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. The comments of the prosecutor, although improper, were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The overwhelming proof of guilt, which included reliable identifications by the victim, the victim’s half-brother, and an uninvolved bystander, militates against reversal on the basis of these comments. There is no significant probability that the jury would have acquitted the defendant had these comments not been made (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 241-242). Hopkins, J. P., Damiani, Rabin and Mangano, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered October 20, 1977, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. The comments of the prosecutor, although improper, were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The overwhelming proof of guilt, which included reliable identifications by the victim, the victim’s half-brother, and an uninvolved bystander, militates against reversal on the basis of these comments. There is no significant probability that the jury would have acquitted the defendant had these comments not been made (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 241-242). Hopkins, J. P., Damiani, Rabin and Mangano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

68 A.D.2d 928, 414 N.Y.S.2d 369, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-alovic-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack