People v. Butler

67 A.D.2d 950, 413 N.Y.S.2d 219, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10728
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 13, 1979
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 67 A.D.2d 950 (People v. Butler) 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. Butler, 67 A.D.2d 950, 413 N.Y.S.2d 219, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10728 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Opinion

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered August 3, 1977, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and new trial ordered. Improper and inflammatory remarks in the prosecutor’s summation, errors in the court’s charge and improper evidentiary rulings require reversal. It was error for the prosecutor to (1) dwell extensively upon the failure of an alibi witness to promptly report her evidence to either the police or the District Attorney since she has no such obligation (see People v Smoot, 59 AD2d 898); (2) denigrate his adversary’s personal attributes; (3) vouch for his own case; and (4) make an emotional appeal to the jury. The court was equally remiss in charging that the defendant must prove the truth of his alibi defense, omitting the burden of proof in this regard, and using the term "evenly balanced” scales. The court’s charge as to the presumption of innocence was similarly weak. In addition, the court improperly denied the request of defense counsel to have a diagram (drawn to scale) and photographs admitted into evidence. The objection of the prosecutor had no foundation in law and the court’s comment, in the presence of the jury, about distortion and failure to "convey the true picture”, was utilized by the prosecutor in summation in his argument that the defense was attempting to fool the jury. In sum, defendant was deprived of a fair trial. Titone, J. P., O’Connor, Shapiro and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Jackson
143 A.D.2d 363 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
People v. La Rosa
112 A.D.2d 954 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)
People v. Brown
111 A.D.2d 248 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)
People v. Townes
104 A.D.2d 1057 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
People v. Wade
99 A.D.2d 474 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
People v. Webb
97 A.D.2d 779 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)
People v. Dawson
406 N.E.2d 771 (New York Court of Appeals, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
67 A.D.2d 950, 413 N.Y.S.2d 219, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10728, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-butler-nyappdiv-1979.