People v. Francois

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Francois

281 A.D.2d 431, 721 N.Y.S.2d 256, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2064

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

DecidedMarch 5, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 281 A.D.2d 431 (People v. Francois) 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. Francois, 281 A.D.2d 431, 721 N.Y.S.2d 256, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2064 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Spires, J.), rendered December 22, 1998, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the prosecutor improperly vouched for the credibility of the People’s witnesses and denigrated defense counsel during summation. We disagree. While some of the prosecutor’s comments exceeded the bounds of proper advocacy, the summation, as a whole, was not so prejudicial as to warrant reversal, particularly since the court sustained defense counsel’s objections and provided curative instructions (see, People v Santiago, 265 AD2d 351; People v Rodriguez, 174 AD2d 763). Friedmann, J. P., Florio, Luciano and Feuerstein, 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 (Spires, J.), rendered December 22, 1998, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the prosecutor improperly vouched for the credibility of the People’s witnesses and denigrated defense counsel during summation. We disagree. While some of the prosecutor’s comments exceeded the bounds of proper advocacy, the summation, as a whole, was not so prejudicial as to warrant reversal, particularly since the court sustained defense counsel’s objections and provided curative instructions (see, People v Santiago, 265 AD2d 351; People v Rodriguez, 174 AD2d 763). Friedmann, J. P., Florio, Luciano and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 A.D.2d 431, 721 N.Y.S.2d 256, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2064, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-francois-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack