People v. Gibeau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gibeau

148 A.D.2d 923, 539 N.Y.S.2d 162, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2483

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

DecidedMarch 10, 1989

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 148 A.D.2d 923 (People v. Gibeau) 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. Gibeau, 148 A.D.2d 923, 539 N.Y.S.2d 162, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2483 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him of criminal mischief in the third degree, defendant argues that prosecutorial misconduct in cross-examining him deprived him of a fair trial and that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Although the prosecutor erred in asking defendant to characterize the People’s witnesses as mistaken and whether defendant considered himself an honest person (see, People v Montgomery, 103 AD2d 622; People v Balkum, 94 AD2d 933), the errors are rendered harmless by the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). Moreover, on this record we conclude that defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137). (Appeal from judgment of Jefferson County Court, Clary, J. — criminal mischief, third degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Boomer, Green, Pine and Davis, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him of criminal mischief in the third degree, defendant argues that prosecutorial misconduct in cross-examining him deprived him of a fair trial and that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Although the prosecutor erred in asking defendant to characterize the People’s witnesses as mistaken and whether defendant considered himself an honest person (see, People v Montgomery, 103 AD2d 622; People v Balkum, 94 AD2d 933), the errors are rendered harmless by the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). Moreover, on this record we conclude that defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137). (Appeal from judgment of Jefferson County Court, Clary, J. — criminal mischief, third degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Boomer, Green, Pine and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

148 A.D.2d 923, 539 N.Y.S.2d 162, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2483, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gibeau-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack