From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Piermont

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 24, 1992
180 A.D.2d 830 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

February 24, 1992

Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (Carey, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant, who is white, argues that the court improperly disallowed one of his three peremptory challenges to black prospective jurors in this prosecution, inter alia, for the attempted murder of a black man. However, the defendant has not provided this court with a record of the voir dire proceedings. Thus, there is no way to review the defendant's claims (see, People v. Childress, 177 A.D.2d 498; People v. Campanella, 176 A.D.2d 813; People v. Morales, 126 A.D.2d 836). Therefore the matter is not properly raised on this appeal (see, People v. Kinchen, 60 N.Y.2d 772; People v. Robinson, 159 A.D.2d 598; People v. Colon, 138 A.D.2d 392; People v. Piparo, 134 A.D.2d 295).

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power (see, CPL 470.15) we find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. The evidence convincingly established that the defendant assaulted the complainant with a knife, inflicting numerous stab wounds that created a substantial risk of death.

We reject the defendant's contention that he was deprived of a fair trial by reason of the cumulative prejudicial effect of comments made by the prosecutor in her opening statement, summation, and cross-examination. Most of the remarks and questions complained of were not objected to at the trial and thus the defendant's present claims of error with respect thereto are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951). Those comments that were objected to were not so egregious as to have deprived the defendant of a fair trial.

We have considered the defendant's contention that the sentence imposed was excessive and find it to be without merit (see, People v. Farrar, 52 N.Y.2d 302, 305; People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Mangano, P.J., Lawrence, Eiber and Miller, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Piermont

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 24, 1992
180 A.D.2d 830 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. Piermont

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CHRISTOPHER PIERMONT…

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

Date published: Feb 24, 1992

Citations

180 A.D.2d 830 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
580 N.Y.S.2d 447

Citing Cases

People v. Turley

Defendant further contends in his pro se supplemental brief that he was denied a fair trial with an impartial…

People v. Davis

Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v. Contes, 60…