People v. Romero

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Romero

197 A.D.2d 493, 604 N.Y.S.2d 714, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10059

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

DecidedOctober 28, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 197 A.D.2d 493 (People v. Romero) 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. Romero, 197 A.D.2d 493, 604 N.Y.S.2d 714, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10059 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Rettinger, J.), rendered November 26,1991, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent prison terms of 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s challenge to the court’s "no inference” charge as given is unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law. Were we to consider the claim, we would affirm as the court’s charge did not draw undue attention to defendant’s decision not to testify (People v Nunez, 182 AD2d 527, lv denied 80 NY2d 836). Concur—Carro, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Kassal, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Rettinger, J.), rendered November 26,1991, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent prison terms of 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s challenge to the court’s "no inference” charge as given is unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law. Were we to consider the claim, we would affirm as the court’s charge did not draw undue attention to defendant’s decision not to testify (People v Nunez, 182 AD2d 527, lv denied 80 NY2d 836). Concur—Carro, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

197 A.D.2d 493, 604 N.Y.S.2d 714, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10059, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-romero-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack