People v. Guiliermo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Guiliermo

197 A.D.2d 636, 604 N.Y.S.2d 765

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

DecidedOctober 18, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 197 A.D.2d 636 (People v. Guiliermo) 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. Guiliermo, 197 A.D.2d 636, 604 N.Y.S.2d 765 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Plug, J.), rendered May 1, 1990, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the prosecutor’s conduct deprived him of a fair trial is without merit. The prosecutor’s comments during summation challenged by the defendant on appeal were a fair response to the defense counsel’s summation (see, People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105; People v Shaw, 150 AD2d 626).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Balls, 69 NY2d 641), and we decline to reach them in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Santucci and Joy, 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 Supreme Court, Queens County (Plug, J.), rendered May 1, 1990, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the prosecutor’s conduct deprived him of a fair trial is without merit. The prosecutor’s comments during summation challenged by the defendant on appeal were a fair response to the defense counsel’s summation (see, People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105; People v Shaw, 150 AD2d 626).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Balls, 69 NY2d 641), and we decline to reach them in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

197 A.D.2d 636, 604 N.Y.S.2d 765, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-guiliermo-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack