From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Lee

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 28, 1994
209 A.D.2d 723 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

November 28, 1994

Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (Herold, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that he was deprived of a fair trial by several allegedly improper comments that were made by the prosecutor while cross-examining the defense witnesses and during summation. We find that the majority of the challenges to the prosecutor's remarks are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05). In any event, the challenged remarks are, for the most part, fair response to the defendant's summation, fair comment on the evidence, or otherwise proper (see, People v Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105; People v. Holland, 204 A.D.2d 483; People v Lamour, 203 A.D.2d 388). The remaining comments are not so prejudicial as to warrant reversal, especially in light of the County Court's curative instructions and the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 237; People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396; People v Holland, supra; People v. Lamour, supra).

We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, O'Brien and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Lee

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 28, 1994
209 A.D.2d 723 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Lee

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. PAUL LEE, Appellant

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

Date published: Nov 28, 1994

Citations

209 A.D.2d 723 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
619 N.Y.S.2d 670

Citing Cases

People v. Stith

The defendant contends that he was deprived of a fair trial by certain comments made by the prosecutor during…

People v. Gay

The majority of the defendant's challenges to the remarks in question are unpreserved for appellate review (…