People v. Coleman

167 A.D.2d 349, 562 N.Y.S.2d 438, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13487
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Coleman. Read the opinion of the Court — 142 A.D.2d 586

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (George, J.), rendered May 19, 1988, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contentions that reversal is required because the prosecutor was permitted to ask leading questions of the complainant is without merit. Although the prosecutor began to ask the complainant a question which was arguably leading in nature (see, Fisch, New York Evidence § 331 [Lond [350]*3502d ed]), defense counsel’s objection interrupted that question and prevented any answer thereto, and the question which was ultimately answered was not leading. We find that the prosecutor’s aborted leading question did not prejudice the defendant.

The sentence imposed was not unduly harsh or excessive under the circumstances (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Kunzeman and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Coleman, 167 A.D.2d 349, 562 N.Y.S.2d 438, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13487 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

167 A.D.2d 349 (People v. Coleman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Suitte
90 A.D.2d 80 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)