From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Scott

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 7, 1988
138 A.D.2d 421 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

March 7, 1988

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


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

During the course of his summation, the prosecutor stated, "I am going to ask you to return to the jury room and return a verdict that is consistent with uncontradicted evidence in this case". This statement was improper, since it constituted a reference to the defendant's failure to testify (see, People v Allen, 127 A.D.2d 840, 841, lv denied 69 N.Y.2d 947). However, this remark went without objection and any claim of prosecutorial misconduct based on it is therefore not preserved for appellate review as a matter of law (see, People v. Dawson, 50 N.Y.2d 311, 324; People v. Williams, 46 N.Y.2d 1070). Even if this claim of prosecutorial misconduct had been preserved for review, we conclude that reversal would not be warranted since the proof of the defendant's guilt is strong, and the likelihood that this remark affected the jury's verdict is minimal.

We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find that they are similarly unpreserved for appellate review, or meritless. Mangano, J.P., Thompson, Bracken and Spatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Scott

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 7, 1988
138 A.D.2d 421 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

People v. Scott

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KEITH SCOTT, Appellant

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

Date published: Mar 7, 1988

Citations

138 A.D.2d 421 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

In any event, we conclude that the prosecutor's comments of which defendant now complains were fair comment…

People v. Jennings

While we agree that the trial court improperly commented on the defendant's failure to testify, the error was…