People v. Chisolm

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Chisolm

241 A.D.2d 346, 660 N.Y.S.2d 976, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7189

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

DecidedJuly 3, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 241 A.D.2d 346 (People v. Chisolm) 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. Chisolm, 241 A.D.2d 346, 660 N.Y.S.2d 976, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7189 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Renee White, J.), rendered March 29, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second and third degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, 6 to 12 years, and 3xh to 7 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s challenges to the prosecutor’s summation are unpreserved (People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951, 952), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review defendant’s claims, we would find that the challenged remarks were fair comments, as they were arguments readily inferable from the evidence, and were in direct response to defense counsel’s summation (People v Shaw, 228 AD2d 291). Concur—Milonas, J. P., Nardelli, Williams, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Renee White, J.), rendered March 29, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second and third degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, 6 to 12 years, and 3xh to 7 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s challenges to the prosecutor’s summation are unpreserved (People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951, 952), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review defendant’s claims, we would find that the challenged remarks were fair comments, as they were arguments readily inferable from the evidence, and were in direct response to defense counsel’s summation (People v Shaw, 228 AD2d 291). Concur—Milonas, J. P., Nardelli, Williams, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

241 A.D.2d 346, 660 N.Y.S.2d 976, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-chisolm-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack