People v. Cepeda

251 A.D.2d 593, 673 N.Y.S.2d 608, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7476
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Cepeda. Read the opinion of the Court — 251 A.D.2d 343

Opinion

—Appeal by the [594]*594defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Thomas, J.), rendered November 18, 1996, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (McGann, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was not deprived of a fair trial by the alleged misconduct of the prosecutor (see, People v Alvino, 71 NY2d 233; People v Ventimiglia, 52 NY2d 350).

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Cepeda, 251 A.D.2d 593, 673 N.Y.S.2d 608, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7476 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

251 A.D.2d 593 (People v. Cepeda) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Ventimiglia
420 N.E.2d 59 (New York Court of Appeals, 1981)
People v. Alvino
519 N.E.2d 808 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)
People v. Suitte
90 A.D.2d 80 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)