From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Warney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 12, 1996
229 A.D.2d 1006 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

July 12, 1996

Appeal from the Ontario County Court, Harvey, J.

Present — Denman, P.J., Pine, Fallon, Callahan and Balio, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The contention of defendant that he was deprived of a fair trial by prosecutorial misconduct is not preserved for our review ( see, CPL 470.05). Were we to exercise our power to review the issue as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice ( see, CPL 470.15 [a]), we would conclude that reversal is not required because the alleged improprieties were not so pervasive or egregious as to deprive defendant of a fair trial ( cf., People v. Mott, 94 A.D.2d 415, 418-419).

We further conclude that the evidence is sufficient to sustain the conviction of burglary in the second degree, and the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence ( see, People v Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495).

Finally, we decline to modify the sentence as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice ( see, CPL 470.15 [b]).


Summaries of

People v. Warney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 12, 1996
229 A.D.2d 1006 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. Warney

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES P. WARNEY…

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

Date published: Jul 12, 1996

Citations

229 A.D.2d 1006 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
646 N.Y.S.2d 467