People v. Harris

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Harris

51 A.D.2d 556, 378 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10812

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

DecidedJanuary 19, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 556 (People v. Harris) 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. Harris, 51 A.D.2d 556, 378 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10812 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County, rendered January 14, 1975, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. We affirm despite our strong disapproval of the improper trial tactics employed by the Assistant District Attorney. His numerous repetition of prejudicial and inflammatory remarks in summation, despite repeated rulings by the trial court that the jury must disregard such remarks, made after appropriate objection by defense counsel, endangered defendant’s right to a trial free from prejudice (see People v Alicea, 37 NY2d 601). However, because the remarks in this case, unlike those in Alicea (p 603), in no way "impaired the [557]*557development of the factual issues and the presentation of testimony as to jeopardize the fairness of the trial”, and because the proof of defendant’s guilt was overwhelming, we find no need to reverse the judgment (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). We have considered the other contentions raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Rabin, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan, Christ and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County, rendered January 14, 1975, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. We affirm despite our strong disapproval of the improper trial tactics employed by the Assistant District Attorney. His numerous repetition of prejudicial and inflammatory remarks in summation, despite repeated rulings by the trial court that the jury must disregard such remarks, made after appropriate objection by defense counsel, endangered defendant’s right to a trial free from prejudice (see People v Alicea, 37 NY2d 601). However, because the remarks in this case, unlike those in Alicea (p 603), in no way "impaired the [557]*557development of the factual issues and the presentation of testimony as to jeopardize the fairness of the trial”, and because the proof of defendant’s guilt was overwhelming, we find no need to reverse the judgment (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). We have considered the other contentions raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Rabin, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan, Christ and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 556, 378 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10812, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-harris-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack