From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Logan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 27, 1995
221 A.D.2d 662 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

November 27, 1995

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


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Although it was error for the prosecutor to suggest during her opening statement that the evidence to be presented at trial had been presented to the Grand Jury, which returned an indictment (see, People v LaDolce, 196 A.D.2d 49, 54-55; People v Sandy, 115 A.D.2d 27, 31), any prejudice was cured by the trial court's instruction to the jury that the indictment has no probative or evidentiary value (see, People v Sanders, 213 A.D.2d 432; People v James, 197 A.D.2d 429).

The defendant's contention that he was prejudiced by certain comments that were made by the prosecutor during her summation is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Comer, 73 N.Y.2d 955; People v Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951), and we decline to reach the issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05) or without merit. Bracken, J.P., Sullivan, Miller and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Logan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 27, 1995
221 A.D.2d 662 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Logan

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KEVIN LOGAN, Appellant

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

Date published: Nov 27, 1995

Citations

221 A.D.2d 662 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
635 N.Y.S.2d 508

Citing Cases

People v. Elder

.Y.3d 911, 912, 828 N.Y.S.2d 274, 861 N.E.2d 89 ; People v. Baez, 137 A.D.3d 805, 805, 27 N.Y.S.3d 161 ). In…

People v. Elder

tement and summation are unpreserved for appellate review, since the defendant either failed to object to the…