People v. Gonzalez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gonzalez

99 A.D.2d 724, 472 N.Y.S.2d 859, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17077

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

DecidedFebruary 21, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 99 A.D.2d 724 (People v. Gonzalez) 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. Gonzalez, 99 A.D.2d 724, 472 N.Y.S.2d 859, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17077 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Harold Silver-man, J.), rendered on April 29, 1981, convicting defendant of murder in the second degree, reckless endangerment in the first degree and two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent indeterminate terms of from 20 years to life, 3Vz to 7 years and two terms of 7Vz to 15 years, respectively, is affirmed. Notwithstanding the fact that the District Attorney committed a number of improprieties, the evidence of guilt was so overwhelming that we do not believe reversal of the defendant’s conviction to be warranted. However, we again caution the District Attorney against resorting to such conduct in the future. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Carro, Silverman, Milonas and Kassal, JJ.

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

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Harold Silver-man, J.), rendered on April 29, 1981, convicting defendant of murder in the second degree, reckless endangerment in the first degree and two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent indeterminate terms of from 20 years to life, 3Vz to 7 years and two terms of 7Vz to 15 years, respectively, is affirmed. Notwithstanding the fact that the District Attorney committed a number of improprieties, the evidence of guilt was so overwhelming that we do not believe reversal of the defendant’s conviction to be warranted. However, we again caution the District Attorney against resorting to such conduct in the future. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Carro, Silverman, Milonas and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 A.D.2d 724, 472 N.Y.S.2d 859, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17077, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gonzalez-nyappdiv-1984.