From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Vanier

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 30, 1998
255 A.D.2d 610 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

November 30, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lewis, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was convicted of robbing the complainant of two chains. A detective testified that after he had a conversation with the complainant, the investigation focused on the defendant. Then, the detective later testified that the defendant was arrested. The defendant now contends that this testimony constitutes impermissible bolstering, requiring reversal. Because the defendant at no time objected to this testimony, his claim is unpreserved for appellate review ( see, People v. West, 56 N.Y.2d 662). In any event, this testimony "merely served as a necessary narrative of events leading to [the] defendant's arrest" ( People v. Stansberry, 205 A.D.2d 317, 318). The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Vanier

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 30, 1998
255 A.D.2d 610 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Vanier

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. COREY VANIER, Also…

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

Date published: Nov 30, 1998

Citations

255 A.D.2d 610 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
680 N.Y.S.2d 877

Citing Cases

People v. Tavarez

The defendant's contention that certain police testimony constituted impermissible bolstering is unpreserved…

State v. Robinson

The defendant's contention that police testimony regarding the circumstances of his arrest should not have…