People v. Love

199 A.D.2d 1024, 608 N.Y.S.2d 916, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12637
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Love. Read the opinion of the Court — 204 A.D.2d 97

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject defendant’s contention that the misconduct of the prosecutor during his cross-examination of the alibi witness was so egregious as to deprive defendant of a fair trial (see, People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396, 401; People v Mott, 94 AD2d 415, 418-419). Defendant’s argument that the trial court erred in failing to compel the People to produce the confidential informant has not been preserved (see, CPL 470.05 [2]) and we decline to review the alleged error in the interest of justice (see, CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). Defendant’s sentence is neither harsh nor excessive. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Kasler, J.—Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present—Green, J. P., Balio, Lawton, Fallon and Davis, JJ.

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

People v. Love, 199 A.D.2d 1024, 608 N.Y.S.2d 916, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12637 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

199 A.D.2d 1024 (People v. Love) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Galloway
430 N.E.2d 885 (New York Court of Appeals, 1981)
People v. Mott
94 A.D.2d 415 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)