People v. Cotto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Cotto

189 A.D.2d 707, 592 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 666

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

DecidedJanuary 26, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 189 A.D.2d 707 (People v. Cotto) 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. Cotto, 189 A.D.2d 707, 592 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 666 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rose Rubin, J.) rendered July 1, 1991, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 3 to 6 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defense counsel’s objection to a question asked of one of the officers concerning defendant’s response, if any, to a question as to whether defendant possessed a valid license for the weapon was sustained, and curative instructions issued. The curative instructions, together with the overwhelming evidence of guilt, rendered defendant’s response harmless (People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230).

Nor is there merit to defendant’s contention that the officers’ inconsistent testimony rendered their testimony incredible as a matter of law. These inconsistencies were for the jury to resolve (People v Mosley, 112 AD2d 812, affd 67 NY2d 985). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Ellerin, Ross and Kassal, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rose Rubin, J.) rendered July 1, 1991, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 3 to 6 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defense counsel’s objection to a question asked of one of the officers concerning defendant’s response, if any, to a question as to whether defendant possessed a valid license for the weapon was sustained, and curative instructions issued. The curative instructions, together with the overwhelming evidence of guilt, rendered defendant’s response harmless (People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230).

Nor is there merit to defendant’s contention that the officers’ inconsistent testimony rendered their testimony incredible as a matter of law. These inconsistencies were for the jury to resolve (People v Mosley, 112 AD2d 812, affd 67 NY2d 985). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Ellerin, Ross and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

189 A.D.2d 707, 592 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 666, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cotto-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack