People v. Woodland
This text of 293 A.D.2d 631 (People v. Woodland) 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.
Opinion
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Blumenfeld, J.), rendered June 7, 1999, 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 failed to preserve for appellate review his-contention that the trial court erred in refusing to admit into evidence a police automobile voucher listing the color of the car in which he was arrested (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245, 248-252). In any event, the voucher constituted extrinsic evidence sought to refute testimony on a collateral matter and was properly excluded by the trial court (see People v Alvino, 71 NY2d 233, 246).
The remarks of the prosecutor in summation were a fair response to comments made during summation and constituted a fair comment upon the evidence (see People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396; People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105).
The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Smith, J.P., Gold-stein, McGinity and H. Miller, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
293 A.D.2d 631, 740 N.Y.S.2d 217, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3726, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-woodland-nyappdiv-2002.