People v. Ayala
| Decision Date | 12 May 1986 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Jose AYALA, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Stuart Birbach, New York City, for appellant.
Elizabeth Holtzman, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Barbara D. Underwood, Brian D. Foley and Darrell Fields, of counsel), for respondent.
Before EIBER, J.P., and KUNZEMAN, KOOPER and SPATT, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Demakos, J.), rendered July 14, 1983, convicting him of burglary in the second degree and petit larceny, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Judgment affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he was denied a Sandoval hearing is not supported by the record. We further find the court did not abuse its discretion when it permitted the People to inquire about the underlying circumstances of the defendant's prior convictions.
Equally unpersuasive is the defendant's argument that he was deprived of a fair trial as a result of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct. The prosecutor's submission to the jury that the asserted defense was not credible was a fair comment on the evidence (see, People v. Baldo, 107 A.D.2d 751, 484 N.Y.S.2d 114). The defendant has failed to preserve for appellate review the issue of the propriety of the prosecutor's suggestion that the defendant fabricated the defense, as he failed to ask for any curative instructions after the court sustained his objection (see, People v. Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951, 441 N.Y.S.2d 442, 424 N.E.2d 276). With respect to the allegation of misconduct by the trial court, we find nothing in the record to support the defendant's claim that the limited interjections by the court prejudiced the defense. A trial court may intervene in the proceedings in order to clarify the issues so long as it does so sparingly, and without partiality, bias or hostility (see, People v. McMahon, 47 N.Y.2d 882, 419 N.Y.S.2d 75, 392 N.E.2d 1258; People v. Ellis, 62 A.D.2d 469, 404 N.Y.S.2d 862).
The defendant's remaining contentions are also without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fagon v. Bara, 86 Civ. 2685.
...required to request a curative instruction in order to preserve his objection to the prosecutor's statement. People v. Ayala, 120 A.D.2d 600, 601, 502 N.Y.S.2d 75, 76 (2d Dep't), app. den., 68 N.Y.2d 755, 506 N.Y.S.2d 1042, 497 N.E.2d 712 (1986); People v. Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951, 953, 441 N.......
-
People v. Scattareggia
...evidence (see, People v. Allen, 99 A.D.2d 592, 471 N.Y.S.2d 418, affd, 64 N.Y.2d 979, 489 N.Y.S.2d 61, 478 N.E.2d 202; People v. Ayala, 120 A.D.2d 600, 502 N.Y.S.2d 75), or unpreserved for appellate review. We find no impropriety in the defendant's sentence. Contrary to his contention, ther......
-
People v. Smith
...v. Fransua, 135 A.D.2d 909, 909-910, 522 N.Y.S.2d 684, lv. denied 71 N.Y.2d 1026, 530 N.Y.S.2d 562, 526 N.E.2d 54; People v. Ayala, 120 A.D.2d 600, 601, 502 N.Y.S.2d 75, lv. denied 68 N.Y.2d 755, 506 N.Y.S.2d 1042, 497 N.E.2d 712). Thus, neither individually nor cumulatively did these impro......
-
People v. Wilson
...393 N.E.2d 467; People v. Jordan, 138 A.D.2d 407, 525 N.Y.S.2d 690; People v. Robinson, supra; People v. Dyer, supra; People v. Ayala, 120 A.D.2d 600, 502 N.Y.S.2d 75; People v. Riddick, 117 A.D.2d 632, 498 N.Y.S.2d 82). The court's comments to the defendant outside of the hearing of the ju......