People v. Carlo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Carlo

278 A.D.2d 54, 717 N.Y.S.2d 531, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13138

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

DecidedDecember 12, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 278 A.D.2d 54 (People v. Carlo) 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. Carlo, 278 A.D.2d 54, 717 N.Y.S.2d 531, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13138 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Solomon, J.), rendered February 2, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of mur[55]*55der in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 25 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s challenges to the prosecutor’s summation are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find that each of the challenged remarks, when examined in context, constituted fair comment on the evidence in response to defendant’s summation, that none of these comments shifted the burden of proof or commented on defendant’s failure to testify or call witnesses, and that the prosecutor’s summation did not deprive defendant of a fair trial (see, People v Overlee, 236 AD2d 133, lv denied 91 NY2d 976; People v D’Alessandro, 184 AD2d 114, 118-119, lv denied 81 NY2d 884).

We perceive no basis for reduction of sentence.

We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining claims, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief. Concur — Tom, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Solomon, J.), rendered February 2, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of mur[55]*55der in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 25 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s challenges to the prosecutor’s summation are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find that each of the challenged remarks, when examined in context, constituted fair comment on the evidence in response to defendant’s summation, that none of these comments shifted the burden of proof or commented on defendant’s failure to testify or call witnesses, and that the prosecutor’s summation did not deprive defendant of a fair trial (see, People v Overlee, 236 AD2d 133, lv denied 91 NY2d 976; People v D’Alessandro, 184 AD2d 114, 118-119, lv denied 81 NY2d 884).

We perceive no basis for reduction of sentence.

We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining claims, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief. Concur — Tom, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

278 A.D.2d 54, 717 N.Y.S.2d 531, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-carlo-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack