From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ferguson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 14, 1997
243 A.D.2d 308 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

October 14, 1997

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


By failing to make specific objections to the challenged comments of the prosecutor during summation ( see, People v. Balls, 69 N.Y.2d 641), or by failing to request further relief when those objections that were lodged were sustained by the court, which also provided curative instructions ( see, People v. Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951), defendant's claims have not been preserved for appellate review as a matter of law and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review them, we would find that "the summation, viewed as a whole and in the context of the relatively uncomplicated nature of this case, may not be characterized as frustrating the jury in reaching a fair and proper determination on the factual issues based solely upon the evidence" ( People v. Alston, 52 A.D.2d 817). This is particularly the case here given the repeated curative instructions provided by the court.

Concur — Milonas, J.P., Wallach, Williams, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Ferguson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 14, 1997
243 A.D.2d 308 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. Ferguson

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. WILLIAM FERGUSON, Also…

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

Date published: Oct 14, 1997

Citations

243 A.D.2d 308 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
664 N.Y.S.2d 521

Citing Cases

Chisolm v. Headley

See, e.g., N YCrim. Proc. Law § 470.05(2) (McKinney's 1998) ("For purposes of appeal, a question of law with…