From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Moore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 29, 1996
226 A.D.2d 745 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

April 29, 1996

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


Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The defendant contends that he was deprived of his right to counsel during a lineup identification procedure. However, he failed to raise or develop this claim until the present appeal, and the record is therefore factually insufficient to permit appellate review of the issue ( see, People v. Kinchen, 60 N.Y.2d 772; People v. Cornelius, 217 A.D.2d 587; People v. Lopez, 160 A.D.2d 335; People v. Donovon, 107 A.D.2d 433).

The defendant has failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that he was prejudiced by certain remarks made by the prosecutor during cross-examination and summation inasmuch as the trial court sustained his objections thereto and the defendant requested no further relief ( see, CPL 470.05; People v. Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951; People v. Dawson, 50 N.Y.2d 311; People v. Lewis, 175 A.D.2d 885). In any event, while some of those comments would have been better left unsaid, they were harmless under the circumstances of this case ( see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230; People v. Smith, 199 A.D.2d 439). Sullivan, J.P., Pizzuto, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Moore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 29, 1996
226 A.D.2d 745 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. Moore

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ERIC MOORE, Appellant

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

Date published: Apr 29, 1996

Citations

226 A.D.2d 745 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
642 N.Y.S.2d 535

Citing Cases

People v. Shelton

The allegedly improper statements made by the prosecutor were, for the most part, a fair response to defense…

People v. LoRusso

There is no merit to the defendant's argument that certain remarks made by the prosecutor during summation…