From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Weston

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 8, 1982
56 N.Y.2d 844 (N.Y. 1982)

Summary

In Weston, a motion for a mistrial on the ground that the State would not be able to connect certain evidence to the defendant did not preserve a claim that the trial judge should have prevented references to that evidence to avoid prejudice.

Summary of this case from Ramchair v. Conway

Opinion

Argued May 3, 1982

Decided June 8, 1982

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, THADDEUS OWENS, J.

Megan Tallmer and William E. Hellerstein for appellant.

Elizabeth Holtzman, District Attorney ( Michael Yoeli and Barbara D. Underwood of counsel), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant's contention that the testimony of the arresting officer could not properly constitute the basis of the trial court's finding of probable cause has not been preserved for our review in that counsel's objections to the court's reliance on the testimony focused upon the sufficiency rather than the reliability of the officer's testimony ( People v Jenkins, 47 N.Y.2d 722).

Similarly unpreserved is defendant's contention that the trial court erred in not issuing a pretrial ruling regarding the admissibility of the knife at trial. If defendant believed that he was prejudiced by references to the knife at trial, to the extent that he was denied a fair trial, it was necessary that he move for a mistrial on this specific ground in order to preserve the issue for appellate review (CPL 470.05, subd 2; 280.10, subd 1; People v Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951). Defendant's only motion for a mistrial, however, which followed the District Attorney's opening statement, was grounded solely upon the People's inability to connect the knife to defendant and was not based on any claim of prejudice as a result of references to the knife.

Finally, we have reviewed defendant's due process claim regarding the prejudicial effect of various remarks by the People in summation and find the contention to be without merit.

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.


Summaries of

People v. Weston

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 8, 1982
56 N.Y.2d 844 (N.Y. 1982)

In Weston, a motion for a mistrial on the ground that the State would not be able to connect certain evidence to the defendant did not preserve a claim that the trial judge should have prevented references to that evidence to avoid prejudice.

Summary of this case from Ramchair v. Conway
Case details for

People v. Weston

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MARK WESTON, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jun 8, 1982

Citations

56 N.Y.2d 844 (N.Y. 1982)
453 N.Y.S.2d 167
438 N.E.2d 873

Citing Cases

Ramchair v. Conway

People v. Smith, 97 N.Y.2d 324, 330, 740 N.Y.S.2d 279, 766 N.E.2d 941, 945 (2002). In its brief submitted…

People v. Singh

With respect to defendant's argument that the prosecutor committed error in asking defendant's brother Mohan…