From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Kirby

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 6, 1998
254 A.D.2d 58 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

October 6, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie Wittner, J.).


Defendant's contentions that the court excessively questioned witnesses, made inappropriate comments, and was biased in favor of the prosecution are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find that the court's participation served to clarify the evidence and control the proceedings ( People v. Person, 251 A.D.2d 13). The court's questioning did not usurp the role of the attorneys and did not convey to the jury that the court had any personal opinion concerning defendant's guilt ( supra).

The trial court properly declined to charge the jury on the defensive use of ordinary physical force, since no reasonable view of the evidence would have supported a finding that other than deadly physical force was utilized ( People v. Butts, 72 N.Y.2d 746, 750; People v. Mickens, 219 A.D.2d 543, lv denied 87 N.Y.2d 904).

We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.

Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach and Williams, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Kirby

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 6, 1998
254 A.D.2d 58 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Kirby

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CURTIS KIRBY, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 6, 1998

Citations

254 A.D.2d 58 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
678 N.Y.S.2d 723

Citing Cases

People v. Deblinger

Even if counsel's objections strike at the heart of the court's conduct, there is no excuse for failing to…