People v. Gibson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gibson

151 A.D.2d 772, 543 N.Y.S.2d 946, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9188

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

DecidedJune 26, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 151 A.D.2d 772 (People v. Gibson) 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. Gibson, 151 A.D.2d 772, 543 N.Y.S.2d 946, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9188 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Fertig, J.), rendered August 10, 1987, convicting him of grand larceny in the third degree and unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

With respect to the alleged errors in the prosecutor’s summation, they were not objected to and are therefore unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951; People v Allen, 135 AD2d 823). In any event, the remarks made by the prosecutor did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial. We find that the sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J. P., Fiber, Harwood and Balletta, 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, Kings County (Fertig, J.), rendered August 10, 1987, convicting him of grand larceny in the third degree and unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

With respect to the alleged errors in the prosecutor’s summation, they were not objected to and are therefore unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951; People v Allen, 135 AD2d 823). In any event, the remarks made by the prosecutor did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial. We find that the sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J. P., Fiber, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

151 A.D.2d 772, 543 N.Y.S.2d 946, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9188, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gibson-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack