From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Caballero

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 18, 1997
242 A.D.2d 337 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

August 18, 1997

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


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's claim that the trial court improperly interfered with his direct examination is unpreserved for appellate review ( see, People v. Charleston, 66 N.Y.2d 886; People v Whitehead, 155 A.D.2d 567). In any event, the defendant was not deprived of a fair trial by the court's conduct. The limited questioning in which the court engaged was designed to clarify the issues and to facilitate the orderly and expeditious progress of the proceedings ( see, People v. Yut Wai Tom, 53 N.Y.2d 44; People v. Whitehead, supra). A review of the record reveals that the court's intervention was appropriate.

The defendant's sentence was not excessive ( see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

The defendant's remaining contentions, including those regarding the propriety of the court's charge, are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, lack merit.

O'Brien, J.P., Sullivan, Goldstein and Luciano, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Caballero

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 18, 1997
242 A.D.2d 337 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. Caballero

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. FELIPE CABALLERO…

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

Date published: Aug 18, 1997

Citations

242 A.D.2d 337 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
661 N.Y.S.2d 980

Citing Cases

People v. Petty

In any event, both Allen charges were balanced and not coercive (see, People v. Pagan, 45 N.Y.2d 725; People…

People v. Mujtaba

The defendant's contention that the court improperly participated in the trial proceedings is not preserved…