From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Woods

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 1, 2002
296 A.D.2d 430 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2000-09324

Submitted June 4, 2002

July 1, 2002.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered September 28, 2000, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

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

William L. Murphy, District Attorney, Staten Island, N.Y. (Karen F. McGee and Anne Crick of counsel), for respondent.

GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, J.P., LEO F. McGINITY, THOMAS A. ADAMS, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's sole contention on appeal is that certain comments made during the prosecutor's summation constitute reversible error. However, the defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his arguments regarding the prosecutor's summation. He either did not make a specific and timely objection, or made no request for further curative instructions and no timely motion for a mistrial (see People v. Heide, 84 N.Y.2d 943; People v. Nuccie, 57 N.Y.2d 818; People v. Robinson, 281 A.D.2d 564) . In any event, any alleged error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230; People v. Stith, 291 A.D.2d 576).

GOLDSTEIN, J.P., McGINITY, ADAMS and TOWNES, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Woods

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 1, 2002
296 A.D.2d 430 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

People v. Woods

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. MICHAEL WOODS, appellant

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

Date published: Jul 1, 2002

Citations

296 A.D.2d 430 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
745 N.Y.S.2d 448

Citing Cases

People v. Woods

January 13, 2003. Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of…

People v. Shelton

Furthermore, we disagree with our dissenting colleague's position that reversal is required because the…