From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rawlings

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 14, 1988
144 A.D.2d 500 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

November 14, 1988

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


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contentions, we are convinced that he was not deprived of a fair trial. The testimony of an Assistant District Attorney who related that the robbery victim had previously identified the defendant at a corporeal lineup was not improperly received since the victim was unable to identify the defendant at trial (CPL 60.25; see, People v. Nival, 33 N.Y.2d 391, appeal dismissed and cert denied 417 U.S. 903). The introduction of the photograph of the lineup and the testimony of the Assistant District Attorney as to the makeup of the lineup did not impermissibly bolster the identification as this evidence merely enabled the jury to best assess whether the lineup was generally fair, or as contended by the defendant at trial, unduly suggestive (cf., People v. Sims, 127 A.D.2d 712, 713-714; People v. Mojica, 122 A.D.2d 81, lv denied 68 N.Y.2d 1002).

Nor was the defendant deprived of a fair trial by the statements of the prosecutor during summation. We note that many of the defendant's arguments raised on appeal were not objected to at trial and hence any error of law with respect thereto was unpreserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05; see, People v Bowen, 50 N.Y.2d 915). In any event, the prosecutor's statements in toto were not improper as his alleged "vouching" for the People's witnesses was a fair response to the defense summation which impugned the credibility of these witnesses (see, People v Crawford, 130 A.D.2d 678). The prosecutor's other statements were similarly proper under the circumstances (see, People v Koleskor, 131 A.D.2d 879, lv denied 70 N.Y.2d 801; People v Turner, 120 A.D.2d 629, lv denied 68 N.Y.2d 673; People v Gavins, 118 A.D.2d 582, lv denied 67 N.Y.2d 1052; People v Oakley, 114 A.D.2d 473, lv denied 66 N.Y.2d 921).

We do not believe that the trial court improperly sentenced the defendant to the terms imposed (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 83). Spatt, J.P., Sullivan, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Rawlings

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 14, 1988
144 A.D.2d 500 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

People v. Rawlings

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. BRUCE RAWLINGS…

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

Date published: Nov 14, 1988

Citations

144 A.D.2d 500 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

People v. Torres

Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not…

People v. Taylor

We reject the defendant's contention that the prosecutor impermissibly bolstered the testimony of the…