People v. Oglesby

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Oglesby

7 A.D.3d 736, 776 N.Y.S.2d 838, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7001

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

DecidedMay 17, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 7 A.D.3d 736 (People v. Oglesby) 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. Oglesby, 7 A.D.3d 736, 776 N.Y.S.2d 838, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7001 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gerges, J.), rendered November 6, 2002, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree (three counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that certain remarks made by the prosecutor during summation warrant reversal of his conviction (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Scotti, 220 AD2d 543 [1995]). In any event, while we agree that some of the challenged remarks were improper, they did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial and do not warrant reversal of the judgment in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction (see People v Bryant, 163 AD2d 406, 407 [1990]; People v Samuel, 122 AD2d 285, 286 [1986]; cf. People v Smith, 288 AD2d 496, 497 [2001]). Ritter, J.P., Smith, H. Miller and Goldstein, 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, Kings County (Gerges, J.), rendered November 6, 2002, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree (three counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that certain remarks made by the prosecutor during summation warrant reversal of his conviction (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Scotti, 220 AD2d 543 [1995]). In any event, while we agree that some of the challenged remarks were improper, they did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial and do not warrant reversal of the judgment in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction (see People v Bryant, 163 AD2d 406, 407 [1990]; People v Samuel, 122 AD2d 285, 286 [1986]; cf. People v Smith, 288 AD2d 496, 497 [2001]). Ritter, J.P., Smith, H. Miller and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 A.D.3d 736, 776 N.Y.S.2d 838, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7001, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-oglesby-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack