From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Morris

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 15, 2003
2 A.D.3d 652 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2002-02314.

Decided December 15, 2003.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lewis, J.), rendered January 28, 2002, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Melissa S. Horlick of counsel), for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Noreen Healey, and Rosemary Chao of counsel), for respondent.

Before: STEPHEN G. CRANE, BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Most of the defendant's challenges to the prosecutor's summation are unpreserved for appellate review since the defense counsel either failed to make specific and timely objections, or failed to seek curative instructions or move for a mistrial where the trial court sustained the defense counsel's objections ( see CPL 470.05; People v. Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951; People v. Clemmings, 300 A.D.2d 672; People v. McHarris, 297 A.D.2d 824, 825). To the extent that the issue is preserved, the prosecutor in his summation did not vouch for the credibility of the People's witnesses and his remarks were responsive to the defendant's summation ( see People v. Harrison, 194 A.D.2d 627; People v. Burgos, 186 A.D.2d 578; People v. Colonna, 135 A.D.2d 724).

SANTUCCI, J.P., ADAMS, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Morris

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 15, 2003
2 A.D.3d 652 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Morris

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. TODD MORRIS, appellant

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

Date published: Dec 15, 2003

Citations

2 A.D.3d 652 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
768 N.Y.S.2d 379

Citing Cases

State v. Love

The defendant's challenges to the prosecutor's summation are unpreserved for appellate review because the…

People v. Wright

Here, the court properly limited defense counsel's cross-examination of the complainant because counsel's…