People v. Delgado

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Delgado

235 A.D.2d 377, 652 N.Y.S.2d 971, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 734

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

DecidedJanuary 30, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 235 A.D.2d 377 (People v. Delgado) 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. Delgado, 235 A.D.2d 377, 652 N.Y.S.2d 971, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 734 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Rettinger, J.), rendered February 1, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4½ to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There was ample evidence of accessorial liability, including defendant’s own acknowledgment, during the drug transaction, that he was working with the codefendant.

[378]*378By failing to object, or by making generalized objections, and by failing to request further relief following sustained objections, defendant has failed to preserve his present challenges to the People’s summation, and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review them, we would find that the People’s summation did not deprive defendant of a fair trial. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Williams, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Rettinger, J.), rendered February 1, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4½ to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There was ample evidence of accessorial liability, including defendant’s own acknowledgment, during the drug transaction, that he was working with the codefendant.

[378]*378By failing to object, or by making generalized objections, and by failing to request further relief following sustained objections, defendant has failed to preserve his present challenges to the People’s summation, and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review them, we would find that the People’s summation did not deprive defendant of a fair trial. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

235 A.D.2d 377, 652 N.Y.S.2d 971, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 734, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-delgado-nyappdiv-1997.