From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Woodwards

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 11, 1995
215 A.D.2d 203 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

May 11, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Vincent Vitale, J.).


Defendant did not object to the prosecutor's single summation comment he now claims deprived him of a fair trial, and thus did not preserve his current claim of error (CPL 470.05; People v Iannelli, 69 N.Y.2d 684, cert denied 482 U.S. 914). In any event, taken in context, the comment constituted appropriate response to the defense summation (People v Marks, 6 N.Y.2d 67, cert denied 362 U.S. 912), and fair comment on the evidence, presented within the broad bounds of rhetorical comment permissible in closing argument (People v Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396). Further, in light of the overwhelming evidence against defendant, any inartful phrasing by the prosecutor in closing argument is deemed harmless error (People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rubin, Ross, Williams and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Woodwards

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 11, 1995
215 A.D.2d 203 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Woodwards

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KEITH WOODWARDS…

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

Date published: May 11, 1995

Citations

215 A.D.2d 203 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
626 N.Y.S.2d 442

Citing Cases

People v. Minkins

05; People v. Iannelli, 69 N.Y.2d 684, cert denied 482 U.S. 914), and we decline to review them in the…