People v. Gordon

306 A.D.2d 422, 760 N.Y.S.2d 873
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 16, 2003·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Reichbach, J.), rendered March 9, 2000, as amended March 16, 2000, convicting him of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment, as amended, is affirmed.

The defendant’s challenges to various remarks made by the prosecutor during summation are unpreserved for appellate review, as the defendant failed to make a timely objection, or alert the court to the basis for the challenge to the remark (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Nuccie, 57 NY2d 818 [1982]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245 [1989]). In any event, the prosecutor’s comments “were either within the bounds of permissible rhetorical comment afforded counsel during summation, responsive to the defendant’s summation, constituted fair comment on the evidence, or related to matters which were fairly inferable from the evidence” (People v Turner, 214 AD2d 594 [1995]; see People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105 [1976]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Santucci, J.P., Florio, Schmidt and Adams, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Gordon, 306 A.D.2d 422, 760 N.Y.S.2d 873 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

306 A.D.2d 422 (People v. Gordon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Spencer
87 A.D.3d 751 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
People v. Perez
77 A.D.3d 974 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)