Opinion
2015–01356 Ind. No. 8990/11
05-29-2019
The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Trevor BROWN, Appellant.
Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Anders Nelson and Michael Arthus of counsel), for appellant. Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Amy Appelbaum, and Arieh Schulman of counsel), for respondent.
Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Anders Nelson and Michael Arthus of counsel), for appellant.
Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Amy Appelbaum, and Arieh Schulman of counsel), for respondent.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P., SHERI S. ROMAN, BETSY BARROS, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.
DECISION & ORDERAppeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Deborah Dowling, J.), rendered May 27, 2014, as amended July 24, 2014, convicting him of burglary in the first degree, robbery in the first degree, grand larceny in the third degree, and petit larceny, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment, as amended, is affirmed.
The defendant contends that he was deprived of a fair trial by the prosecutor's misconduct during cross-examination and summation. Any instances of prosecutorial misconduct during cross-examination and summation were not, either individually or collectively, so egregious as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial (see People v. Pringle, 136 A.D.3d 1061, 1063, 25 N.Y.S.3d 635 ; People v. Cherry, 127 A.D.3d 879, 880, 5 N.Y.S.3d 527 ). Moreover, any other error in this regard was harmless, as there was overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt, and no significant probability that any error contributed to the defendant's convictions (see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 241–242, 367 N.Y.S.2d 213, 326 N.E.2d 787 ; People v. Velez, 164 A.D.3d 622, 78 N.Y.S.3d 671 ).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in permitting the People to present rebuttal testimony (see CPL 260.30[7] ). Although a witness may not be impeached with extrinsic evidence on a collateral issue (see People v. Wise, 46 N.Y.2d 321, 328, 413 N.Y.S.2d 334, 385 N.E.2d 1262 ), here, the rebuttal witness's testimony was relevant to the defense put forth by the defendant (see People v. Morin, 146 A.D.3d 901, 902, 45 N.Y.S.3d 512 ; People v. Diaz, 100 A.D.3d 446, 447, 954 N.Y.S.2d 20, affd 24 N.Y.3d 1187, 3 N.Y.S.3d 745, 27 N.E.3d 459 ).
CHAMBERS, J.P., ROMAN, BARROS and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.