People v. Jackson
This text of 179 A.D.2d 680 (People v. Jackson) 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.
Opinion
The defendant contends that he was denied his right to a fair trial by the combined prejudicial effect of a prosecution witness’s statement which implicitly informed the jury that he had a prior conviction and the court’s curative instruction in relation thereto. We disagree.
Any prejudice which might have arisen as a result of the prosecution witness’s statement was eliminated when the court sustained the defense counsel’s objection and administered prompt and, contrary to the defendant’s contention, effective curative instructions (see, People v Santiago, 52 NY2d 865). The defense counsel’s motion for a mistrial was therefore properly denied. Kunzeman, J. P., Balletta, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
179 A.D.2d 680, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jackson-nyappdiv-1992.