People v. Whitted

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Whitted

153 A.D.2d 651, 544 N.Y.S.2d 731, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10898

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

DecidedAugust 14, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 153 A.D.2d 651 (People v. Whitted) 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. Whitted, 153 A.D.2d 651, 544 N.Y.S.2d 731, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10898 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (King, J.), rendered May 24, 1985, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention, inter alia, that he was denied his due process right to a fair trial because of specific instances of prosecutorial misconduct is without merit. Of those allegedly prejudicial remarks of the prosecutor during summation which were properly preserved for appellate review (see, People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951), none exceeded the bounds of permissible rhetorical comment (see, People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions raised by his attorney and by him pro se and find them to be either without merit or unpreserved for appellate review. Kooper, J. P., Spatt, Harwood and Rosenblatt, 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 County Court, Dutchess County (King, J.), rendered May 24, 1985, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention, inter alia, that he was denied his due process right to a fair trial because of specific instances of prosecutorial misconduct is without merit. Of those allegedly prejudicial remarks of the prosecutor during summation which were properly preserved for appellate review (see, People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951), none exceeded the bounds of permissible rhetorical comment (see, People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions raised by his attorney and by him pro se and find them to be either without merit or unpreserved for appellate review. Kooper, J. P., Spatt, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

153 A.D.2d 651, 544 N.Y.S.2d 731, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10898, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-whitted-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack