From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rankine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 8, 1996
229 A.D.2d 453 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

July 8, 1996

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


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's assertions on appeal, the court did not err in refusing to grant a missing witness charge concerning an alleged witness named Clary. The defendant failed to establish prima facie that, inter alia, Clary was knowledgeable about a material issue ( see, People v. Kitching, 78 N.Y.2d 532, 536; People v. Dianda, 70 N.Y.2d 894, 896).

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review many of his objections to the People's summation ( see, People v. Bynum, 70 N.Y.2d 858; CPL 470.05). In any event, although certain comments made by the prosecutor were better left unsaid, none of the comments, either alone or in the aggregate, warrant reversal of the defendant's conviction ( see, People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396; People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105; People v. Bartolomeo, 126 A.D.2d 375).

The defendant's sentence was neither harsh nor excessive ( see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Rosenblatt, J.P., Ritter, Copertino and Joy, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Rankine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 8, 1996
229 A.D.2d 453 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. Rankine

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. HOPETON RANKINE…

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

Date published: Jul 8, 1996

Citations

229 A.D.2d 453 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
644 N.Y.S.2d 899