From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Noland

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 19, 1993
189 A.D.2d 829 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

January 19, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lipp, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant claims that his rights were violated when the jury requested trial exhibits, and the court either failed to respond or did so without consulting counsel. Since this claim rests on matters which are not contained in the record, its presentation on direct appeal is improper (see, People v Weinberg, 183 A.D.2d 930).

The defendant also claims that the prosecutor made several impermissible statements during summation which require reversal of the judgment. These contentions are either without merit or unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Pellechia, 144 A.D.2d 704, 705). In any event, because the evidence against the defendant was overwhelming, any error regarding the prosecutor's summation remarks would be harmless (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230). Lawrence, J.P., Eiber, Miller and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Noland

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 19, 1993
189 A.D.2d 829 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

People v. Noland

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MARVIN NOLAND…

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

Date published: Jan 19, 1993

Citations

189 A.D.2d 829 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
592 N.Y.S.2d 465

Citing Cases

People v. Williams

Therefore, this issue is both unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Tutt, 38 N.Y.2d…

People v. Smith

The Appendix materials were obtained by the Legal Aid Society in January of 1994, in an unrelated case…