People v. Oakley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Oakley

114 A.D.2d 473, 494 N.Y.S.2d 383, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53168

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

DecidedOctober 21, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by30 cases

This text of 114 A.D.2d 473 (People v. Oakley) 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. Oakley, 114 A.D.2d 473, 494 N.Y.S.2d 383, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53168 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Fuchs, J.), rendered March 11, 1983, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Since defendant did not object to any of the comments made by the prosecutor at the trial, no error of law was preserved for appellate review (see, People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951). In any event, there was not such misconduct as to deny defendant a fair trial. The remark concerning the witness’s lack of motivation to lie was a proper comment on his credibility, which was at issue on the trial (see, People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105). Nor was it improper to tell the jury that the prosecutor did not know the whereabouts of a potential witness since several times in his summation defense counsel had referred to the failure to call her (see, People v Marks, 6 NY2d 67, cert denied 362 US 912). The other comments were not so prejudicial as to cause the trial to be unfair, especially in light of the overwhelming evidence against defendant (cf. People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396). Bracken, J. P., Weinstein, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Fuchs, J.), rendered March 11, 1983, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Since defendant did not object to any of the comments made by the prosecutor at the trial, no error of law was preserved for appellate review (see, People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951). In any event, there was not such misconduct as to deny defendant a fair trial. The remark concerning the witness’s lack of motivation to lie was a proper comment on his credibility, which was at issue on the trial (see, People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105). Nor was it improper to tell the jury that the prosecutor did not know the whereabouts of a potential witness since several times in his summation defense counsel had referred to the failure to call her (see, People v Marks, 6 NY2d 67, cert denied 362 US 912). The other comments were not so prejudicial as to cause the trial to be unfair, especially in light of the overwhelming evidence against defendant (cf. People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396). Bracken, J. P., Weinstein, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 A.D.2d 473, 494 N.Y.S.2d 383, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-oakley-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack