People v. Lamar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Lamar

202 A.D.2d 269, 609 N.Y.S.2d 785, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2438

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

DecidedMarch 15, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 202 A.D.2d 269 (People v. Lamar) 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. Lamar, 202 A.D.2d 269, 609 N.Y.S.2d 785, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2438 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Sheridan, J.), rendered March 3, 1992, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4 Vi to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s claim that he was denied a fair trial by the prosecutor’s summation is not preserved for appellate review as a matter of law, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. If we were to review it, we would find that the challenged comments properly constituted either fair comment on the evidence or were made in response to defense counsel’s comments on summation attacking the credibility of the People’s witnesses (see, People v Marks, 6 NY2d 67, 77-78, cert denied 362 US 912). Concur — Carro, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Kupferman and Nardelli, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Sheridan, J.), rendered March 3, 1992, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4 Vi to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s claim that he was denied a fair trial by the prosecutor’s summation is not preserved for appellate review as a matter of law, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. If we were to review it, we would find that the challenged comments properly constituted either fair comment on the evidence or were made in response to defense counsel’s comments on summation attacking the credibility of the People’s witnesses (see, People v Marks, 6 NY2d 67, 77-78, cert denied 362 US 912). Concur — Carro, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Kupferman and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 A.D.2d 269, 609 N.Y.S.2d 785, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2438, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lamar-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack