People v. Arzon
This text of 174 A.D.2d 684 (People v. Arzon) 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.
Opinion
—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Curci, J.), rendered November 2, 1988, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
[685]*685Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s contention that he was denied his right to a fair trial by the trial court’s failure to give a limiting instruction to the jury with regard to the People’s use of his prior crimes is not preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Thomas, 50 NY2d 467; People v Yates, 160 AD2d 1036). We decline to exercise our interest of justice discretion in view of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 242; People v Yates, supra).
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, we find that he was not denied a fair trial by prosecutorial misconduct during the People’s summation. After the defendant objected to the prosecutor’s allegedly improper comment, the court gave the jury a curative instruction. Since the defendant failed to request any further ameliorative action, "it must be assumed that any defect was cured to the defense counsel’s satisfaction” (People v Shaw, 150 AD2d 626, 627, citing People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951, 953; see also, CPL 470.05 [2]). In any event, the prosecutor’s remarks were fair comment on the evidence (see, People v Pugliese, 131 AD2d 789, 790; People v Brown, 124 AD2d 667, 668). Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Eiber and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
174 A.D.2d 684, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-arzon-nyappdiv-1991.