People v. Marks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Marks

6 A.D.2d 677, 173 N.Y.S.2d 850, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5845

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

DecidedMay 20, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 6 A.D.2d 677 (People v. Marks) 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. Marks, 6 A.D.2d 677, 173 N.Y.S.2d 850, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5845 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

The evidence in this case supports the judgment of conviction very strongly, and the said judgment is unanimously affirmed. However, we are constrained to comment upon the impropriety of certain portions of the prosecutor’s summation. In vouching for the truthfulness of witnesses with unsavory backgrounds, and for the conduct of police officers, the prosecutor attempted to bolster the credibility of these witnesses with the prestige of his office, his own character and personality. No matter how provocative the closing statement of defense counsel might be, there can be no justification for such tactics. Concur—-Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, McNally and Bergan, JJ.

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

The evidence in this case supports the judgment of conviction very strongly, and the said judgment is unanimously affirmed. However, we are constrained to comment upon the impropriety of certain portions of the prosecutor’s summation. In vouching for the truthfulness of witnesses with unsavory backgrounds, and for the conduct of police officers, the prosecutor attempted to bolster the credibility of these witnesses with the prestige of his office, his own character and personality. No matter how provocative the closing statement of defense counsel might be, there can be no justification for such tactics. Concur—-Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, McNally and Bergan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 A.D.2d 677, 173 N.Y.S.2d 850, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5845, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-marks-nyappdiv-1958.