People v. Hofler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hofler

64 A.D.2d 656, 407 N.Y.S.2d 215, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12471

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

DecidedJuly 17, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 64 A.D.2d 656 (People v. Hofler) 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. Hofler, 64 A.D.2d 656, 407 N.Y.S.2d 215, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12471 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered March 19, 1976, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. While several comments in the [657]*657prosecutor’s summation were improper, the errors were harmless and do not warrant the granting of a new trial (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). Although the County Court should have made separate findings of fact after the suppression hearing, the opinion of the court contains implicit findings and we sustain them. We have considered the other points raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Mellen, P. J., Hopkins, Titone, Shapiro and O’Connor, 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, Nassau County, rendered March 19, 1976, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. While several comments in the [657]*657prosecutor’s summation were improper, the errors were harmless and do not warrant the granting of a new trial (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). Although the County Court should have made separate findings of fact after the suppression hearing, the opinion of the court contains implicit findings and we sustain them. We have considered the other points raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Mellen, P. J., Hopkins, Titone, Shapiro and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 A.D.2d 656, 407 N.Y.S.2d 215, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12471, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hofler-nyappdiv-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack