People v. Faustin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Faustin

35 A.D.3d 499, 826 N.Y.S.2d 139

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

DecidedDecember 5, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 35 A.D.3d 499 (People v. Faustin) 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. Faustin, 35 A.D.3d 499, 826 N.Y.S.2d 139 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Blumenfeld, J.), rendered April 29, 2002, convicting him of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant claims that he was deprived of a fair trial by prosecutorial misconduct during trial and on summation. However, except for his claims that the prosecutor on summation misstated the defense counsel’s closing argument and attacked the defense counsel’s integrity, his contentions are unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951, 953 [1981]). In any event, his claims are without merit and any error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of his guilt (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 242 [1975]). Schmidt, J.P., Mastro, Fisher and Dillon, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Blumenfeld, J.), rendered April 29, 2002, convicting him of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant claims that he was deprived of a fair trial by prosecutorial misconduct during trial and on summation. However, except for his claims that the prosecutor on summation misstated the defense counsel’s closing argument and attacked the defense counsel’s integrity, his contentions are unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951, 953 [1981]). In any event, his claims are without merit and any error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of his guilt (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 242 [1975]). Schmidt, J.P., Mastro, Fisher and Dillon, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

35 A.D.3d 499, 826 N.Y.S.2d 139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-faustin-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack