People v. Glover

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Glover

237 A.D.2d 104, 655 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2133

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

DecidedMarch 4, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 237 A.D.2d 104 (People v. Glover) 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. Glover, 237 A.D.2d 104, 655 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2133 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Obús, J.), rendered December 13, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 3 to 6 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s claim that the court improperly failed to inquire of a juror whether she had been paying attention during summation is unpreserved for appellate review since defendant failed to request an inquiry and did not object to the court’s reliance on its own observations (see, People v Jones, 173 AD2d 359, lv denied 78 NY2d 1077), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. In any event, the court’s observations served as a sound basis for it to determine that an inquiry was not needed (see, People v McIntyre, 193 AD2d 626, lv denied 82 NY2d 757). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Obús, J.), rendered December 13, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 3 to 6 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s claim that the court improperly failed to inquire of a juror whether she had been paying attention during summation is unpreserved for appellate review since defendant failed to request an inquiry and did not object to the court’s reliance on its own observations (see, People v Jones, 173 AD2d 359, lv denied 78 NY2d 1077), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. In any event, the court’s observations served as a sound basis for it to determine that an inquiry was not needed (see, People v McIntyre, 193 AD2d 626, lv denied 82 NY2d 757). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

237 A.D.2d 104, 655 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-glover-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack