People v. Materon

276 A.D.2d 718, 716 N.Y.S.2d 313, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10870
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 23, 2000
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 276 A.D.2d 718 (People v. Materon) 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. Materon, 276 A.D.2d 718, 716 N.Y.S.2d 313, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10870 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Schulman, J.), rendered January 19, 1999, convicting him of robbery in the second degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that reversible error took place when the prosecutor repeatedly asked him during cross-examination why he did not ask his co-arrestees at either the arrest scene, the precinct station house, or the arraignment to exonerate [719]*719him, and that such error was compounded when the prosecutor referred to the defendant’s pretrial silence during summation. Counsel for the defense raised a general objection to the prosecutor’s questions on this subject on one occasion, and objections on different grounds on other occasions. These objections are not sufficient to preserve this issue for appellate review (see, People v West, 212 AD2d 651; People v Blacks, 221 AD2d 351; see generally, People v Qualls, 55 NY2d 733; People v Odiot, 242 AD2d 308). Further, the defendant’s claim regarding the prosecutor’s summation remarks is similarly unpreserved (see, People v Gonzalez, 202 AD2d 606).

In any event, any error on the part of the prosecutor was rendered harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt (see, People v Basora, 75 NY2d 992; People v Covington, 161 AD2d 784). Ritter, J. P., Sullivan, H. Miller and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Thomas
2019 NY Slip Op 795 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Boley
116 A.D.3d 965 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
People v. Bellman
112 A.D.3d 732 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
People v. Tucker
87 A.D.3d 1077 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
People v. Howard
48 A.D.3d 481 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
People v. Beauliere
36 A.D.3d 623 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
People v. Rivera
27 A.D.3d 491 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
276 A.D.2d 718, 716 N.Y.S.2d 313, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10870, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-materon-nyappdiv-2000.