From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Burgos

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 29, 1998
253 A.D.2d 718 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

September 29, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Felice Shea, J.).


Defendant's contentions that he was deprived of a fair trial by the admission of the complainant's testimony that she sought an order of protection on the day following the sexual assault and by the prosecutor's comment upon this fact in summation have not been preserved for appellate review and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find that the testimony was properly admitted as a "prompt outcry" ( People v. McDaniel, 81 N.Y.2d 10, 16; People v. Fabian, 213 A.D.2d 298, lv denied 85 N.Y.2d 972), and that error in this regard, if any, was harmless.

Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Nardelli, Rubin, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Burgos

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 29, 1998
253 A.D.2d 718 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Burgos

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANDRES BURGOS, Also…

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

Date published: Sep 29, 1998

Citations

253 A.D.2d 718 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
678 N.Y.S.2d 256

Citing Cases

People v. Anthony C

Although harmless error, the First Department held that this testimony was improperly received as a prompt…

People v. Anthony C

Although harmless error, the First Department held that this testimony was improperly received as a prompt…