From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Favor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 26, 1991
172 A.D.2d 1052 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

April 26, 1991

Appeal from the Monroe County Court, Connell, J.

Present — Callahan, J.P., Doerr, Green, Balio and Lowery, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant argues that the court erred in permitting the prosecutor to refer to unreliable chemical test results in his opening statement. We disagree. The court instructed the jury that the opening statements did not constitute evidence. The court also told the jury to disregard the chemist's testimony about the testing procedures.

Defendant failed to preserve for review his contention that the court erred in conducting a Sandoval hearing (see, People v Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371) in his absence and, since defendant did not establish prejudice, we decline to reach the issue in the interest of justice (see, People v. Dunbar, 172 A.D.2d 1006 [decided herewith]). Defendant's remaining contention lacks merit.


Summaries of

People v. Favor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 26, 1991
172 A.D.2d 1052 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Favor

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DONALD FAVOR, Appellant

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

Date published: Apr 26, 1991

Citations

172 A.D.2d 1052 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
569 N.Y.S.2d 306

Citing Cases

People v. Lomack

This argument has not been preserved for review (see, CPL 470.05), and the error, if any, must be deemed…

People v. Favor

The Second Department also demonstrated some uncertainty about the correct resolution of the issue (compare,…