People v. Mohammed

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mohammed

254 A.D.2d 373, 678 N.Y.S.2d 532, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10777

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

DecidedOctober 13, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 254 A.D.2d 373 (People v. Mohammed) 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. Mohammed, 254 A.D.2d 373, 678 N.Y.S.2d 532, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10777 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (McDonald, J.), rendered October 14, 1997, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

The defendant’s challenges to remarks made by the prosecutor during summation are largely unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]) and, in any event, the remarks do not warrant reversal of the judgment.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit or do not require reversal. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (McDonald, J.), rendered October 14, 1997, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

The defendant’s challenges to remarks made by the prosecutor during summation are largely unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]) and, in any event, the remarks do not warrant reversal of the judgment.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit or do not require reversal. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D.2d 373, 678 N.Y.S.2d 532, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10777, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mohammed-nyappdiv-1998.