From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Swindall

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 23, 1987
128 A.D.2d 819 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

March 23, 1987

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


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

On the instant appeal, the defendant argues that reversible error was committed by the prosecutor in his summation when he allegedly vouched for the credibility of his witnesses and inflamed the jury by his comments (see, People v. Whitehurst, 87 A.D.2d 896; People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105). The defendant's argument must be rejected. The record indicates that defense counsel did not interpose a timely objection to the remarks in the prosecutor's summation of which he now complains and consequently the alleged errors have not been preserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05). In any event, reversal in the interests of justice is not warranted since for the most part, the remarks constituted fair comment on the evidence and the proof of the defendant's guilt was overwhelming (see, People v Scott, 108 A.D.2d 882; People v. Gutierrez, 105 A.D.2d 754). Mangano, J.P., Thompson, Niehoff and Spatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Swindall

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 23, 1987
128 A.D.2d 819 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

People v. Swindall

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. VINCENT SWINDALL…

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

Date published: Mar 23, 1987

Citations

128 A.D.2d 819 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

People v. Pugliese

The defendant's contention that statements by the prosecutor improperly referred to matters outside of the…

People v. Phelps

We find this contention to be without merit as the court's charge, when read as a whole, properly conveyed to…