People v. Montez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Montez

203 A.D.2d 216, 611 N.Y.S.2d 172, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4379

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

DecidedApril 28, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 203 A.D.2d 216 (People v. Montez) 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. Montez, 203 A.D.2d 216, 611 N.Y.S.2d 172, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4379 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Howard Bell, J.), rendered May 14, 1992, convicting defendant, after jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of controlled substance in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 5 to 10 years and 3 to 6 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant failed to object to any of the prosecutor’s summation comments that he now claims deprived him of a fair trial, and thus failed to preserve his current claims of error (CPL 470.05; People v Iannelli, 69 NY2d 684, cert denied 482 US 914). In any event, the prosecutor’s comments regarding credibility of the police witnesses were responsive to the defense summation (People v Marks, 6 NY2d 67, cert denied 362 US 912). Although the prosecutor might better have utilized milder terms in summation than "a story” and "a frenzy of lies”, his characterization of defendant’s testimony as "patently false” was accurate (see, People v Jones, 162 AD2d 204, lv denied 76 NY2d 859).

Defendant has withdrawn his argument based on a Sandoval violation. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Ellerin, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Howard Bell, J.), rendered May 14, 1992, convicting defendant, after jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of controlled substance in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 5 to 10 years and 3 to 6 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant failed to object to any of the prosecutor’s summation comments that he now claims deprived him of a fair trial, and thus failed to preserve his current claims of error (CPL 470.05; People v Iannelli, 69 NY2d 684, cert denied 482 US 914). In any event, the prosecutor’s comments regarding credibility of the police witnesses were responsive to the defense summation (People v Marks, 6 NY2d 67, cert denied 362 US 912). Although the prosecutor might better have utilized milder terms in summation than "a story” and "a frenzy of lies”, his characterization of defendant’s testimony as "patently false” was accurate (see, People v Jones, 162 AD2d 204, lv denied 76 NY2d 859).

Defendant has withdrawn his argument based on a Sandoval violation. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Ellerin, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

203 A.D.2d 216, 611 N.Y.S.2d 172, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4379, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-montez-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack