From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Concepcion

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1999
266 A.D.2d 227 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

Submitted September 23, 1999

November 1, 1999

Lisa Manfro, Kew Gardens, N.Y., for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Lisa Drury, and Allison Wright of counsel), for respondent.

LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Blumenfeld, J.), rendered November 8, 1996, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

There is no merit to the defendant's argument that he was deprived of a fair trial by prosecutorial misconduct. When a case is tried without a jury, absent a showing of prejudice, the Trial Judge is presumed to have considered only competent evidence adduced at trial in reaching the verdict (see, People v. Robinson, 143 A.D.2d 376, 377 ). There is no basis for finding that the court considered anything but competent evidence.

BRACKEN, J.P., FRIEDMANN, GOLDSTEIN, and SMITH, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Concepcion

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1999
266 A.D.2d 227 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

People v. Concepcion

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. JOSE CONCEPCION, appellant. (Ind. No…

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

Date published: Nov 1, 1999

Citations

266 A.D.2d 227 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
697 N.Y.S.2d 697

Citing Cases

People v. Pruchnicki

lthough the victim had an opportunity to inform her mother of the incident prior to calling her sister, we…

People v. Hughes

However, since the evidence adduced at the combined hearing and trial was not so intertwined that this court…