From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Bergsma

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 28, 1991
170 A.D.2d 408 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

February 28, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County, Thomas Galligan, J., Joan C. Sudolnik, J.


Defendant contends that he was deprived of a fair trial by the cumulative impact of the prosecutor's summation comments, in which the prosecutor denigrated the defense, vouched for his witnesses, shifted the burden of proof, referred to matters outside the record, instructed the jury on the law, and appealed to juror prejudice and emotion. Most of these challenges to the prosecutor's comments are unpreserved, and we decline to review in the interest of justice (CPL 470.05). In the remaining instances, the prejudice to defendant was obviated by the court's prompt curative instructions. Further, any errors were harmless in light of overwhelming evidence of guilt.

Concur — Carro, J.P., Ellerin, Kupferman, Smith and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Bergsma

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 28, 1991
170 A.D.2d 408 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Bergsma

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. WILLIAM BERGSMA…

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

Date published: Feb 28, 1991

Citations

170 A.D.2d 408 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
566 N.Y.S.2d 620

Citing Cases

People v. Bell

The misstatement by the prosecutor in summation, to which defendant did not object, was immediately corrected…