From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Espinal

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 8, 1991
175 A.D.2d 177 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

July 8, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Beerman, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not deprived of a fair trial by the prosecutor's cross-examination of him, or by the prosecutor's summation, both of which noted that the store where the defendant was employed was owned by persons from the Dominican Republic. While references to race or national origin should be avoided unless relevant to a matter at issue, the prosecutor's references to national origin were not numerous, nor did they urge the jury to judge the credibility of the witnesses based upon that national origin (cf., People v Thomas, 129 A.D.2d 596; People v Pascullo, 120 A.D.2d 687). Under the circumstances, any error was harmless.

The sentence imposed was not excessive. Kunzeman, J.P., Sullivan, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Espinal

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 8, 1991
175 A.D.2d 177 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Espinal

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. EFRAIN ESPINAL…

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

Date published: Jul 8, 1991

Citations

175 A.D.2d 177 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
572 N.Y.S.2d 334

Citing Cases

People v. Tai

Were we to review these claims, we would find that the court's comments and questions did not deprive…