From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Tart

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 6, 2003
305 A.D.2d 137 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

1050

May 6, 2003.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Phylis Skloot Bamberger, J.), rendered February 10, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of reckless endangerment in the first degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree and possession of a stolen vehicle, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to consecutive terms of 3½ to 7 years on the reckless endangerment and stolen property convictions and a concurrent term of 1 to 3 years on the stolen vehicle conviction, unanimously affirmed.

Nisha M. Desai, for respondent.

Svetlana M. Kornfeind, for defendant-appellant.

Before: Buckley, P.J., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Sullivan, Gonzalez, JJ.


The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations. Defendant's guilt of first-degree reckless endangerment was established by evidence, properly credited by the jury, that during a high-speed chase defendant violated various traffic laws and nearly struck pedestrians and oncoming cars.

The court properly precluded defendant from making a summation argument that strayed beyond the parameters of the evidence ( see People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396, 399). Defendant received ample latitude in which to attack the credibility of the police witnesses, and the court's isolated ruling did not interfere with his ability to deliver a summation and present a defense.

The court's interested witness charge was appropriate, when read as a whole and in the context of the entire trial ( see People v. Inniss, 83 N.Y.2d 653, 659; People v. Agosto, 73 N.Y.2d 963, 967; People v. Pizarro, 190 A.D.2d 634, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 1018).

Defendant's remaining contention is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find no basis for reversal.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Tart

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 6, 2003
305 A.D.2d 137 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Tart

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MAURICE TART…

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

Date published: May 6, 2003

Citations

305 A.D.2d 137 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
757 N.Y.S.2d 842

Citing Cases

People v. Washington

05 [b]). Nothing in the evidence supported a theory that the victim's wallet somehow fell out of his pocket…

People v. King

We also reject defendant's argument that these verdicts were against the weight of the evidence ( see People…