From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 1, 2003
305 A.D.2d 125 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

1030

May 1, 2003.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene Silverman, J.), rendered December 21, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of auto stripping in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

Patrick J. Hynes, for respondent.

Jeffrey I. Richman, for defendant-appellant.

Before: Saxe, J.P., Ellerin, Williams, Lerner, Marlow, JJ.


Even if we were to find that the court should have granted defendant's motion to suppress the physical evidence recovered as a result of a warrantless search of defendant's bag made after it had been removed from him by the officers and he had been arrested and handcuffed (see People v. Gokey, 60 N.Y.2d 309), we would find the error to be harmless (see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).

The court properly exercised its discretion in precluding defendant's attempt to impeach the arresting officer with an omission from a memo book entry, since the purported inconsistency had no probative value under the circumstances (see People v. King, 276 A.D.2d 319, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 736).

The court properly precluded defendant from urging the jury to draw a negative inference from the People's failure to call an additional police witness, since there was an insufficient evidentiary foundation for such a comment (see People v. Tankleff, 84 N.Y.2d 992, 994-995; People v. Vasquez, 288 A.D.2d 17, lv denied 97 N.Y.2d 734). The court accorded defendant ample latitude in which to comment on the alleged lack of corroborating evidence.

The challenged portions of the prosecutor's summation did not deprive defendant of a fair trial. While the two isolated remarks at issue would have been better left unsaid, the court's instructions, both during the People's summation and in its main charge, were sufficient to prevent any prejudice ( see People v. Davis, 58 N.Y.2d 1102).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 1, 2003
305 A.D.2d 125 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DWAYNE SMITH…

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

Date published: May 1, 2003

Citations

305 A.D.2d 125 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
757 N.Y.S.2d 748

Citing Cases

People v. Ponder

The record further establishes that defendant's consent to search the vehicle was voluntary ( see generally…