People v. Nedal

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Nedal

198 A.D.2d 42, 603 N.Y.S.2d 454, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10445

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

DecidedNovember 9, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 198 A.D.2d 42 (People v. Nedal) 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. Nedal, 198 A.D.2d 42, 603 N.Y.S.2d 454, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10445 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John Stackhouse, J.), rendered October 18, 1991, convicting defendant, after jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 5 to 10 years and 2Vz to 5 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Contrary to defendant’s argument, the testimony of the arresting officer in this case was not incredible as a matter of law. The relatively minor discrepancies therein were fully explained, and the jury’s credibility determinations, not unreasonable, will not be disturbed by this Court (People v Fonte, 159 AD2d 346, lv denied 76 NY2d 734).

The trial court acted within its discretion in determining that the official court interpreter was competent and that all instances of possible misunderstanding were sufficiently rectified so that the witness’ testimony was properly presented to the jury (see, People v Frazier, 159 AD2d 278, lv denied 76 NY2d 857). Additionally, any undue prejudice to defendant that may have emanated from the clarifying questions and answers was obviated by the trial court’s curative instruction, which it is presumed the jury understood and followed (People v Davis, 58 NY2d 1102, 1104). Similarly, any error in the prosecutor’s summation comments was rendered harmless by the trial court’s prompt curative instructions (which were repeated in the main charge) and by the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt of the crimes charged (People v Rodriguez, 103 AD2d 121, 129). Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Ross, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John Stackhouse, J.), rendered October 18, 1991, convicting defendant, after jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 5 to 10 years and 2Vz to 5 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Contrary to defendant’s argument, the testimony of the arresting officer in this case was not incredible as a matter of law. The relatively minor discrepancies therein were fully explained, and the jury’s credibility determinations, not unreasonable, will not be disturbed by this Court (People v Fonte, 159 AD2d 346, lv denied 76 NY2d 734).

The trial court acted within its discretion in determining that the official court interpreter was competent and that all instances of possible misunderstanding were sufficiently rectified so that the witness’ testimony was properly presented to the jury (see, People v Frazier, 159 AD2d 278, lv denied 76 NY2d 857). Additionally, any undue prejudice to defendant that may have emanated from the clarifying questions and answers was obviated by the trial court’s curative instruction, which it is presumed the jury understood and followed (People v Davis, 58 NY2d 1102, 1104). Similarly, any error in the prosecutor’s summation comments was rendered harmless by the trial court’s prompt curative instructions (which were repeated in the main charge) and by the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt of the crimes charged (People v Rodriguez, 103 AD2d 121, 129). Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Ross, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 A.D.2d 42, 603 N.Y.S.2d 454, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10445, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-nedal-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack