From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Riddick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 3, 1986
117 A.D.2d 632 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

February 3, 1986

Appeal from the County Court, Dutchess County (Rosenblatt, J.).


Judgment affirmed.

On the present record, it cannot be concluded that the Trial Justice unduly or improperly interjected himself into the proceedings or displayed hostility or bias prejudicial to defendant. Indeed, some of the actions of the court complained of by defendant actually resulted in rulings favorable to him. Viewing the record as a whole and closely examining the specific claims raised by defendant, the record clearly indicates that the court maintained an unbiased and impartial demeanor at trial and, when it did inject itself into the fact-finding process, it did so in the proper exercise of its supervisory function (see, e.g., People v. Jamison, 47 N.Y.2d 882, 884; People v. De Jesus, 42 N.Y.2d 519, 523).

We have examined defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Riddick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 3, 1986
117 A.D.2d 632 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

People v. Riddick

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DAVID RIDDICK…

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

Date published: Feb 3, 1986

Citations

117 A.D.2d 632 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

People v. Wilson

In any event, the record reveals that when the defendant repeatedly gave unresponsive answers during direct…

People v. McCoy

Hence, no further warnings were necessary (see, People v Glinsman, supra). Furthermore, we reject the…