From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Walser

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 2, 2010
71 A.D.3d 706 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)

Opinion

No. 2008-05904.

March 2, 2010.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Konviser, J.), rendered June 20, 2008, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, assault in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Barry Stendig of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Solomon Neubort, and Bruce Alderman of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Mastro, J.P., Angiolillo, Balkin and Sgroi, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's claim that some of the prosecutor's comments during summation were improper and deprived him of a fair trial is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v Valdes, 66 AD3d 925; People v Lino, 65 AD3d 1263; People v Rodari, 2 AD3d 756). In any event, to the extent that any of the challenged comments were improper, they were not so egregious as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial ( see People v Valerio, 70 AD3d 869; People v Franklin, 64 AD3d 614).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Walser

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 2, 2010
71 A.D.3d 706 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
Case details for

People v. Walser

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DAVID WALSER, Appellant

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

Date published: Mar 2, 2010

Citations

71 A.D.3d 706 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 1828
894 N.Y.S.2d 913

Citing Cases

People v. Walser

May 26, 2010. Appeal from the 2d Dept: 71 AD3d 706 (Kings). (Ciparick,…

People v. Ricardo Garcia-Villegas

The defendant's contentions, however, are not preserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05), inasmuch as…