People v. Vasquez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Vasquez

159 A.D.2d 262, 552 N.Y.S.2d 262, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2645

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

DecidedMarch 13, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 159 A.D.2d 262 (People v. Vasquez) 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. Vasquez, 159 A.D.2d 262, 552 N.Y.S.2d 262, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2645 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Frank J. Blangiardo, J.), rendered March 17, 1986, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first and second degrees (Penal Law §§ 160.15, 160.10) and sentencing him to concurrent, indeterminate terms of imprisonment of from 4lA to 9 years and 3 to 6 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

In the early morning hours of October 18, 1985, defendant and an accomplice, Edwin Santana, sprayed Gregory Hill with a Mace-like substance and took $20 from him at knifepoint. Hill reported the robbery to the police, who apprehended defendant and Santana two blocks from the scene, and within minutes of the incident. A knife was recovered from defendant’s waistband. [263]*263On appeal, defendant claims that he was deprived of his right to counsel when the trial court instructed the jury, on more than one occasion, to disregard the personal opinions and theories of the attorneys, as expressed during summations. While such comments are not proper (see, People v Reina, 94 AD2d 727), defendant did not preserve the claim for appellate review by timely objection (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Balls, 69 NY2d 641) and we decline to reach it in the interest of justice. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Milonas, Kassal and Wallach, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Frank J. Blangiardo, J.), rendered March 17, 1986, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first and second degrees (Penal Law §§ 160.15, 160.10) and sentencing him to concurrent, indeterminate terms of imprisonment of from 4lA to 9 years and 3 to 6 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

In the early morning hours of October 18, 1985, defendant and an accomplice, Edwin Santana, sprayed Gregory Hill with a Mace-like substance and took $20 from him at knifepoint. Hill reported the robbery to the police, who apprehended defendant and Santana two blocks from the scene, and within minutes of the incident. A knife was recovered from defendant’s waistband. [263]*263On appeal, defendant claims that he was deprived of his right to counsel when the trial court instructed the jury, on more than one occasion, to disregard the personal opinions and theories of the attorneys, as expressed during summations. While such comments are not proper (see, People v Reina, 94 AD2d 727), defendant did not preserve the claim for appellate review by timely objection (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Balls, 69 NY2d 641) and we decline to reach it in the interest of justice. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Milonas, Kassal and Wallach, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

159 A.D.2d 262, 552 N.Y.S.2d 262, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2645, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-vasquez-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack