From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Nunez

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Feb 2, 2017
147 A.D.3d 423 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

02-02-2017

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Roberto NUNEZ, Defendant–Appellant.

Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Susan H. Salomon of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Susan Gliner of counsel), for respondent.


Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Susan H. Salomon of counsel), for appellant.

Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Susan Gliner of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Thomas Farber, J.), rendered November 26, 2013, as amended January 30, 2014, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of three counts each of murder in the first and second degrees, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to an aggregate term of life without parole, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant's legal sufficiency claim is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we reject it on the merits. We also find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 348–349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 [2007] ). Defendant's exculpatory testimony did not place the evidence in "equipoise," as defendant asserts. On the contrary, the jury could have reasonably found defendant's testimony incredible and disregarded it, while instead accepting the People's compelling circumstantial case.

The prosecutor's remarks in summation fell within the broad bounds of rhetorical comment permissible in closing argument (see People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396, 399, 446 N.Y.S.2d 9, 430 N.E.2d 885 [1981] ). The People were entitled to argue that their case was strong, that defendant's testimony was incredible, and that defendant's status as an interested witness was one of the factors affecting his credibility. Nothing in the People's phrasing of these arguments was so inflammatory as to warrant reversal.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

SWEENY, J.P., ACOSTA, MOSKOWITZ, KAPNICK, KAHN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Nunez

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Feb 2, 2017
147 A.D.3d 423 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

People v. Nunez

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Roberto NUNEZ…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Feb 2, 2017

Citations

147 A.D.3d 423 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
45 N.Y.S.3d 794
2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 732

Citing Cases

People v. Sommerville

Moreover, defendant demonstrated his consciousness of guilt by attempting to bribe the victim into not…

People v. Sommerville

Moreover, defendant demonstrated his consciousness of guilt by attempting to bribe the victim into not…