People v. Waisome

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Waisome

253 A.D.2d 776, 677 N.Y.S.2d 491, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9395

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

DecidedSeptember 14, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 253 A.D.2d 776 (People v. Waisome) 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. Waisome, 253 A.D.2d 776, 677 N.Y.S.2d 491, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9395 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lipp, J.), rendered October 10, 1995, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contentions that certain remarks made by the prosecutor during summation constitute reversible error [777]*777are, for the most part, unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Zephir, 226 AD2d 408). In any event, the comments made by the prosecutor during summation were either fair comment on the evidence, permissive rhetorical comment, responsive to the defendant’s summation (see, People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105; People v Turner, 214 AD2d 594), or were not so prejudicial as to constitute reversible error in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). Miller, J. P., Kraus man, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lipp, J.), rendered October 10, 1995, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contentions that certain remarks made by the prosecutor during summation constitute reversible error [777]*777are, for the most part, unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Zephir, 226 AD2d 408). In any event, the comments made by the prosecutor during summation were either fair comment on the evidence, permissive rhetorical comment, responsive to the defendant’s summation (see, People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105; People v Turner, 214 AD2d 594), or were not so prejudicial as to constitute reversible error in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). Miller, J. P., Kraus man, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 A.D.2d 776, 677 N.Y.S.2d 491, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9395, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-waisome-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack