From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Jacobs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 8, 1996
225 A.D.2d 1088 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

March 8, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Wolfgang, J.

Present — Pine, J.P., Lawton, Wesley, Balio and Davis, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Because defendant did not object to the prosecutor's summation, her argument that the prosecutor's characterization of the witnesses was improper is not preserved for our review ( see, CPL 470.05; People v Pierce, 219 A.D.2d 856). In any event, the prosecutor's isolated comment did not deprive defendant of a fair trial ( see, People v Dunbar, 213 A.D.2d 1000, lv denied 85 N.Y.2d 972).

Under the circumstances of this case, the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. We have reviewed the contention raised in defendant's pro se supplemental brief and conclude that it is without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Jacobs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 8, 1996
225 A.D.2d 1088 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. Jacobs

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. LINDA JACOBS, Appellant

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

Date published: Mar 8, 1996

Citations

225 A.D.2d 1088 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
639 N.Y.S.2d 194

Citing Cases

People v. Olsowske

Because defendant objected to only one of the alleged instances of misconduct, he failed to preserve for our…

People v. Hess

By failing to object to most of the statements by the prosecutor that are now alleged to constitute…