People v. Greenwood

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Greenwood

294 A.D.2d 598, 742 N.Y.S.2d 886, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5517

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

DecidedMay 28, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 294 A.D.2d 598 (People v. Greenwood) 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. Greenwood, 294 A.D.2d 598, 742 N.Y.S.2d 886, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5517 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Calabrese, J.), rendered May 3, 1999, convicting her of grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s contention that the cumulative effect of certain remarks made by the prosecutor during summation constituted reversible error is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Vasquez, 277 AD2d 333). In any event, the comments made by the prosecutor during summation were largely proper comments on the evidence (see generally People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105, 109). Moreover, any prejudice which may have resulted from the comments was ameliorated by the trial court’s curative instructions (see People v Ferguson, 82 NY2d 837, 838; People v Vasquez, supra).

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Feuerstein, J.P., Krausman, Luciano and Crane, 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 County Court, Nassau County (Calabrese, J.), rendered May 3, 1999, convicting her of grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s contention that the cumulative effect of certain remarks made by the prosecutor during summation constituted reversible error is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Vasquez, 277 AD2d 333). In any event, the comments made by the prosecutor during summation were largely proper comments on the evidence (see generally People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105, 109). Moreover, any prejudice which may have resulted from the comments was ameliorated by the trial court’s curative instructions (see People v Ferguson, 82 NY2d 837, 838; People v Vasquez, supra).

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Feuerstein, J.P., Krausman, Luciano and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 598, 742 N.Y.S.2d 886, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5517, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-greenwood-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack