People v. Grant

54 A.D.3d 872, 863 N.Y.S.2d 377
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 16, 2008·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

With one exception, the defendant’s claims of prosecutorial [873]*873misconduct are unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]). With respect to the only preserved issue, the court clearly instructed the jury that the burden of proof remained with the People and did not shift to the defendant (see People v Farino, 21 AD3d 427 [2005]). In any event, as to the unpreserved issues, the challenged remarks either were a fair response to the defendant’s summation (see People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396 [1981]), or constituted harmless error (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 242 [1975]; People v Adam, 50 AD3d 1153 [2008], Iv denied 10 NY3d 931 [2008]). Rivera, J.R, Lifson, Santucci and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Grant, 54 A.D.3d 872, 863 N.Y.S.2d 377 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

54 A.D.3d 872 (People v. Grant) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Morrison
59 A.D.3d 569 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)