From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Barham

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 14, 1991
170 A.D.2d 270 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

February 14, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Levittan, J.).


After defendant and his accomplices pushed the complainant off a train and onto a subway platform, they forcibly stole his gold chain. Since the People presented legally sufficient evidence of the complainant's "impairment of physical condition", defendant's conviction of robbery in the second degree is unassailable (Penal Law § 160.10; § 10.00 [9]; People v Rojas, 61 N.Y.2d 726). The complainant missed three days of work and saw a doctor as result of the punches to his face and ribs. Furthermore, three witnesses corroborated the fact that the complainant's face was bloodied and swollen.

Although the prosecutor should not have equated the jury returning a guilty verdict with the acts of a Good Samaritan who came to the complainant's aid, any prejudice caused by this single improper summation comment was harmless. Finally, since the court adequately advised the jury of the legal principles applicable to the facts of the case, the court did not deprive defendant of a fair trial by failing to marshall the evidence (CPL 300.10; People v Jackson, 125 A.D.2d 410, 411).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Wallach, Kupferman and Kassal, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Barham

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 14, 1991
170 A.D.2d 270 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Barham

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DANIEL BARHAM…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Feb 14, 1991

Citations

170 A.D.2d 270 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
565 N.Y.S.2d 523

Citing Cases

Matter of Effrin

There was ample opportunity to inspect the ballistics report, which was furnished approximately six weeks…