From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Shagi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 26, 2001
288 A.D.2d 495 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

2000-00139

Argued October 30, 2001.

November 26, 2001.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Pitts, J.), rendered December 3, 1999, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Susan B. Marhoffer, Mount Kisco, N.Y., for appellant.

James M. Catterson, Jr., District Attorney, Riverhead, N Y (Thomas C. Costello of counsel), for respondent.

Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, SANDRA L. TOWNES, A. GAIL PRUDENTI, JJ.


ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's present challenges to various remarks made by the prosecutor on summation are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05). In any event, the challenged comments "were either within the bounds of permissible rhetorical comment afforded counsel during summation, responsive to the defendant's summation, constituted fair comment on the evidence, or related to matters which were fairly inferable from the evidence" (People v. Turner, 214 A.D.2d 594).

The defendant's contention that the People failed to prove his guilt by legally sufficient evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt of robbery in the first degree beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).

A review of the record demonstrates that the defendant was not deprived of his right to the effective assistance of counsel (see, People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708; People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either waived (cf., People v. Molina, 241 A.D.2d 329), unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05), or without merit.

RITTER, J.P., FEUERSTEIN, TOWNES and PRUDENTI, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Shagi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 26, 2001
288 A.D.2d 495 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

People v. Shagi

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. MICHAEL SHAGI, appellant

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

Date published: Nov 26, 2001

Citations

288 A.D.2d 495 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
733 N.Y.S.2d 881

Citing Cases

People v. Stevens

The remaining challenges to the prosecutor's remarks during summation are unpreserved for appellate review…

People v. Singletary

ndant's contention that the prosecutor's summation remarks deprived him of a fair trial is not preserved for…