From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Oreckinto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 28, 1998
253 A.D.2d 896 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

September 28, 1998

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


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

On appeal, the defendant argues that reversible error took place due to the prosecutor's comments during summation. Because the defendant's objections were either too general or the defendant did not seek further curative instructions or a mistrial after the court sustained his objections, these claims of error are not preserved for appellate review ( see, CPL 470.05; People v. Heide, 84 N.Y.2d 943, 944; People v. Nuccie, 57 N.Y.2d 818, 819; People v. Persaud, 237 A.D.2d 538). In any event, the prosecutor's statements were fair comment upon the evidence and the legitimate inferences to be drawn therefrom and fairly responded to the defense counsel's summation ( see, People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105, 109; People v. Scotti, 220 A.D.2d 543; People v. Shepherd, 176 A.D.2d 369, 370).

Copertino, J.P., Santucci, Goldstein and Luciano, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Oreckinto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 28, 1998
253 A.D.2d 896 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Oreckinto

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOHN ORECKINTO…

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

Date published: Sep 28, 1998

Citations

253 A.D.2d 896 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
678 N.Y.S.2d 521

Citing Cases

People v. Nicholas

The defendant's claims of error with respect to instances of alleged prosecutorial misconduct during the…

People v. Johnson

The defendant's challenges to various remarks made by the prosecutor during his summation are unpreserved for…