People v. Woody

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Woody

271 A.D.2d 625, 707 N.Y.S.2d 847, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4333

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

DecidedApril 17, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 271 A.D.2d 625 (People v. Woody) 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. Woody, 271 A.D.2d 625, 707 N.Y.S.2d 847, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4333 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gerges, J.), rendered December 22, 1997, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that remarks made in the course of the prosecutor’s summation improperly attacked his credibility. [626]*626However, in light of the nature of the statements made by both attorneys in their summations, the remarks of the prosecutor were reasonable (see, People v Estrella, 156 AD2d 710; People v Draskin, 145 AD2d 500, 501).

The sentence was neither harsh nor excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, 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 (Gerges, J.), rendered December 22, 1997, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that remarks made in the course of the prosecutor’s summation improperly attacked his credibility. [626]*626However, in light of the nature of the statements made by both attorneys in their summations, the remarks of the prosecutor were reasonable (see, People v Estrella, 156 AD2d 710; People v Draskin, 145 AD2d 500, 501).

The sentence was neither harsh nor excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 625, 707 N.Y.S.2d 847, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4333, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-woody-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack