People v. Bland

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bland

219 A.D.2d 566, 632 N.Y.S.2d 463, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9637

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 28, 1995·Published

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul Bookson, J.), rendered August 2, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4¾ to 9½ years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s argument that the prosecutor’s summation constituted improper vouching for the credibility of a police officer is unpreserved as a matter of law, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice (People v Tardbania, 72 NY2d 852). Were we to review it, we would find defendant’s argument to be meritless. The prosecutor’s comments concerning the credibility of the officer were a fair response to defense argument that the officer, who had observed one sale while he was on a bus, and another drug transaction from a street-level vantage point, was lying, due to his bias, hostility, and desire to advance his career and/or to cover up a mistake (People v Bolden, 216 AD2d 45). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Asch, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul Bookson, J.), rendered August 2, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4¾ to 9½ years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s argument that the prosecutor’s summation constituted improper vouching for the credibility of a police officer is unpreserved as a matter of law, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice (People v Tardbania, 72 NY2d 852). Were we to review it, we would find defendant’s argument to be meritless. The prosecutor’s comments concerning the credibility of the officer were a fair response to defense argument that the officer, who had observed one sale while he was on a bus, and another drug transaction from a street-level vantage point, was lying, due to his bias, hostility, and desire to advance his career and/or to cover up a mistake (People v Bolden, 216 AD2d 45). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Asch, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

People v. Bland, 219 A.D.2d 566, 632 N.Y.S.2d 463, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9637 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

219 A.D.2d 566 (People v. Bland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related