People v. Herrera

289 A.D.2d 592, 736 N.Y.S.2d 236, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13103
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Herrera. Read the opinion of the Court — 287 A.D.2d 579

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Lange, J.), rendered September 24, 1999, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that he was denied a fair trial by the prosecutor’s misconduct during summation. In determining whether the prosecutor’s remarks amounted to misconduct, his summation must be examined in the context of the summation delivered by the defense counsel (see, People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396). While some of the prosecutor’s comments might have been strident, his summation does not warrant reversal (see, People v Russo, 201 AD2d 512, affd 85 NY2d 872). Krausman, J. P., Friedmann, Feuerstein and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Herrera, 289 A.D.2d 592, 736 N.Y.S.2d 236, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13103 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

289 A.D.2d 592 (People v. Herrera) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Russo
649 N.E.2d 1195 (New York Court of Appeals, 1995)
People v. Galloway
430 N.E.2d 885 (New York Court of Appeals, 1981)
People v. Russo
201 A.D.2d 512 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)