People v. Toledo

156 A.D.2d 266, 548 N.Y.S.2d 892, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15760
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Toledo. Read the opinion of the Court — 177 A.D.2d 988

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Sheindlin, J.), rendered April 14, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted burglary in the third degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140.20), and sentencing him, as a predicate felon, to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of from 1 Vi to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.

The contention of defendant that he was deprived of due process because of the prosecutor’s remarks in summation is not preserved as a matter of law and we, therefore, decline to reach it. Were we to consider it in the interest of justice, we would nonetheless affirm, finding it to be without merit. The prosecutor’s comments were justified as a response to defense counsel’s remarks. (People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396.) Further, any possible error was harmless in light of the overwhelming proof of guilt. (People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230.) Concur— Kupferman, J. P., Asch, Kassal, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

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

People v. Toledo, 156 A.D.2d 266, 548 N.Y.S.2d 892, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15760 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

156 A.D.2d 266 (People v. Toledo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Crimmins
326 N.E.2d 787 (New York Court of Appeals, 1975)
People v. Galloway
430 N.E.2d 885 (New York Court of Appeals, 1981)