From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 30, 1998
255 A.D.2d 600 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

November 30, 1998

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


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's claims regarding certain comments made by the prosecutor during summation are for the most part unpreserved for appellate review ( see, CPL 470.05; People v. Tevaha, 84 N.Y.2d 879, 881; People v. Balls, 69 N.Y.2d 641; People v. Scotti, 220 A.D.2d 543). In any event, most of the comments constituted a legitimate response to the defense counsel's summation ( see, People v. Griffith, 231 A.D.2d 530; People v. Rawlings, 144 A.D.2d 500; People v. Miller, 143 A.D.2d 1055), and none of the remarks was so prejudicial as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial ( see, People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396).

The court considered appropriate factors in imposing sentence ( see, People v. Barnes, 219 A.D.2d 527; People v. Jackson, 208 A.D.2d 862, 863), and we find no basis for reducing the sentence ( see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

Rosenblatt, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 30, 1998
255 A.D.2d 600 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Jones

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CHERYL JONES, Appellant

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

Date published: Nov 30, 1998

Citations

255 A.D.2d 600 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
682 N.Y.S.2d 604

Citing Cases

People v. Hilliard

The defendant's contention that certain remarks made by the prosecutor during summation were improper is…