People v. Roberson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Roberson

225 A.D.2d 401, 640 N.Y.2d 7, 640 N.Y.S.2d 7, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2713

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

DecidedMarch 19, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 225 A.D.2d 401 (People v. Roberson) 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. Roberson, 225 A.D.2d 401, 640 N.Y.2d 7, 640 N.Y.S.2d 7, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2713 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

[402]*402Defendant’s claim that the prosecutor’s summation remark bolstered the testimony of the police witnesses and violated the unsworn witness rule is unpreserved for appellate review, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review it, we would find that the prosecutor’s comment that in order to accept the defense argument, the jury would have to believe that the officers had lied from the inception of the prosecution as well as during the Grand Jury proceedings and hearing in this case, was responsive to defense counsel’s summation. In any event, any error in this regard would be harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of guilt. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

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

[402]*402Defendant’s claim that the prosecutor’s summation remark bolstered the testimony of the police witnesses and violated the unsworn witness rule is unpreserved for appellate review, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review it, we would find that the prosecutor’s comment that in order to accept the defense argument, the jury would have to believe that the officers had lied from the inception of the prosecution as well as during the Grand Jury proceedings and hearing in this case, was responsive to defense counsel’s summation. In any event, any error in this regard would be harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of guilt. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 A.D.2d 401, 640 N.Y.2d 7, 640 N.Y.S.2d 7, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2713, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-roberson-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack