People v. Witherspoon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Witherspoon

298 A.D.2d 415, 751 N.Y.S.2d 387, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9405

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

DecidedOctober 7, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 298 A.D.2d 415 (People v. Witherspoon) 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. Witherspoon, 298 A.D.2d 415, 751 N.Y.S.2d 387, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9405 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme, Kings County (Ruchelsman, J.), rendered June 5, 2000, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that certain comments by the prosecutor during summation were improper is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Hunte, 276 AD2d 717). In any event, the prosecutor’s summation does not require reversal (see People v Hunte, supra; People v Lawson, 275 AD2d 721).

[416]*416The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Ritter, J.P., Santucci, Goldstein and Mastro, JJ., concur. [See 186 Misc 2d 62.]

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, Kings County (Ruchelsman, J.), rendered June 5, 2000, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that certain comments by the prosecutor during summation were improper is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Hunte, 276 AD2d 717). In any event, the prosecutor’s summation does not require reversal (see People v Hunte, supra; People v Lawson, 275 AD2d 721).

[416]*416The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Ritter, J.P., Santucci, Goldstein and Mastro, JJ., concur. [See 186 Misc 2d 62.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

298 A.D.2d 415, 751 N.Y.S.2d 387, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9405, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-witherspoon-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack