From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Pierce

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 29, 1995
219 A.D.2d 856 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

September 29, 1995

Appeal from the Erie County Court, Rogowski, J.

Present — Lawton, J.P., Fallon, Callahan, Davis and Boehm, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Because defendants did not object to the prosecutor's summation, their argument that several of the prosecutor's comments were improper is not preserved for our review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Bruce, 216 A.D.2d 913; People v Gaines, 216 A.D.2d 858; People v Dunbar, 213 A.D.2d 1000, lv denied 85 N.Y.2d 972). In any event, the prosecutor's characterization of the defense's contentions as a "smokescreen" did not exceed the broad bounds of rhetorical comment permissible in closing arguments (see, People v Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396, 399).


Summaries of

People v. Pierce

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 29, 1995
219 A.D.2d 856 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Pierce

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOSEPH PIERCE…

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

Date published: Sep 29, 1995

Citations

219 A.D.2d 856 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
632 N.Y.S.2d 905

Citing Cases

People v. McFadden

Moreover, the defendant has not preserved for appellate review his contention that certain remarks by the…

People v. Koberstein

Defendant likewise failed to object to the prosecutor's summation, and thus his contention that several of…