Opinion
March 3, 1986
Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (Rosato, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
On this appeal, the defendant contends that the trial court erred when it refused to grant his motion for a mistrial after the prosecutor removed from the back of his chair the coat the defendant wore into the courtroom, and asked that it be marked for identification. He argues that this unwarranted action led the jury to believe that this was the same coat worn by the perpetrator on the day of the robbery.
We disagree. A decision to grant or deny a motion for a mistrial is within the trial court's discretion (see, People v Ortiz, 54 N.Y.2d 288). That decision should not be disturbed unless it amounts to an abuse of discretion (see, Hall v Potoker, 49 N.Y.2d 501).
In the case at bar, the trial court promptly rendered a curative instruction and precluded any use of the coat by the People. Because these actions ameliorated whatever prejudice may have accrued to the defendant, the denial of the motion for a mistrial did not constitute an abuse of discretion (see, People v. Young, 48 N.Y.2d 995).
The defendant's remaining contentions have been examined and found to be without merit. Lawrence, J.P., Eiber, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.