People v. Toumbis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Toumbis

204 A.D.2d 1026, 614 N.Y.S.2d 958, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6852

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

DecidedMay 27, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 204 A.D.2d 1026 (People v. Toumbis) 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. Toumbis, 204 A.D.2d 1026, 614 N.Y.S.2d 958, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6852 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that he was denied a fair trial by the prosecutor’s misconduct during the cross-examination of defendant and during the prosecutor’s summation. The majority of the alleged errors have not been preserved for our review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to review them as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see, CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). Because those errors that were preserved "were not so egregious or prejudicial as to deprive defendant of a fair trial, reversal is not warranted” (People v Dawkins, 203 AD2d 957, 958, citing People v Roopchand, 107 AD2d 35, affd 65 NY2d 837; People v Widger, 126 AD2d 962, Iv denied 69 NY2d 1011).

Defendant’s contentions concerning the court’s charge are unpreserved (see, CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to review them as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see, CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), is sufficient to support defendant’s conviction of assault in the second degree (see, Penal Law § 120.05 [4]), and the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). (Appeal from Judgment of Erie County Court, Drury, J.—Assault, 2nd Degree.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Lawton, Wesley and Callahan, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that he was denied a fair trial by the prosecutor’s misconduct during the cross-examination of defendant and during the prosecutor’s summation. The majority of the alleged errors have not been preserved for our review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to review them as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see, CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). Because those errors that were preserved "were not so egregious or prejudicial as to deprive defendant of a fair trial, reversal is not warranted” (People v Dawkins, 203 AD2d 957, 958, citing People v Roopchand, 107 AD2d 35, affd 65 NY2d 837; People v Widger, 126 AD2d 962, Iv denied 69 NY2d 1011).

Defendant’s contentions concerning the court’s charge are unpreserved (see, CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to review them as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see, CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), is sufficient to support defendant’s conviction of assault in the second degree (see, Penal Law § 120.05 [4]), and the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). (Appeal from Judgment of Erie County Court, Drury, J.—Assault, 2nd Degree.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Lawton, Wesley and Callahan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 A.D.2d 1026, 614 N.Y.S.2d 958, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6852, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-toumbis-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack