People v. Cheeks
| Decision Date | 15 December 1978 |
| Citation | 66 A.D.2d 1021,411 N.Y.S.2d 736 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Steven Eugene CHEEKS, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Edward J. Nowak, Rochester by William E. Hasenauer, Rochester, for appellant.
Lawrence T. Kurlander, Rochester by Kenneth R. Fisher, Rochester, for respondent.
Before CARDAMONE, J. P., and DILLON, HANCOCK, SCHNEPP and WITMER, JJ.
Although we agree that the Trial Court erred in its charge on the issue of intent (see People v. O'Neill, 59 A.D.2d 540, 542, 397 N.Y.S.2d 408, 411) and that subsequent to its initial proper charge on the defense of justification (Penal Law, § 35.15, subd. 2(a)) the Court's further statements on that issue were misleading, neither of those points was preserved for review (People v. Fonseca, 36 N.Y.2d 133, 365 N.Y.S.2d 818, 325 N.E.2d 143; CPL 470.05).
Additionally, while the Court's determination to charge a lesser degree of assault was not made until after defendant's summation (see People v. Graham, 57 A.D.2d 478, 481, 394 N.Y.S.2d 982, 984, aff'd 44 N.Y.2d 768, 406 N.Y.S.2d 36, 377 N.E.2d 480), the error thus committed was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt (People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 367 N.Y.S.2d 213, 326 N.E.2d 787). The theory of the defense was justification and it may not be said, on the facts of this case, that the defendant was denied his right to an effective summation (People v. Vicaretti, 54 A.D.2d 236, 250, 388 N.Y.S.2d 410, 419; see also, People v. Chapman, 60 A.D.2d 584, 400 N.Y.S.2d 104).
In view of the overwhelming proof of defendant's guilt, we are not moved to reverse in the interests of justice (see People v. Jones, 32 A.D.2d 1069, 1070, 303 N.Y.S.2d 921, 922, aff'd 27 N.Y.2d 501, 312 N.Y.S.2d 677, 260 N.E.2d 870).
Judgment unanimously affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. McNeely
...view of the overwhelming proof of defendant's guilt, we are not moved to reverse in the interests of justice (People v. Cheeks (Steven), 66 A.D.2d 1021, 1022, 411 N.Y.S.2d 736; People v. Jones, 32 A.D.2d 1069, 1070, 303 N.Y.S.2d 921, affd. 27 N.Y.2d 501, 312 N.Y.S. 677, 260 N.E.2d 870). Def......
-
People v. Willis
...), we find that defendant was not prejudiced by the error and that, therefore, reversal is not warranted (see People v. Cheeks, 66 A.D.2d 1021, 1022, 411 N.Y.S.2d 736; People v. Vicaretti, 54 A.D.2d 236, 250, 388 N.Y.S.2d 410). Defendant was indicted for manslaughter, first degree (intentio......
-
People v. Coast, 1
...defendants were convicted of offenses as charged in the indictment (People v. Scott, 66 A.D.2d 861, 411 N.Y.S.2d 383; People v. Cheeks, 66 A.D.2d 1021, 411 N.Y.S.2d 736; People v. Chapman, 60 A.D.2d 584, 400 N.Y.S.2d 104; People v. Vicaretti, 54 A.D.2d 236, 388 N.Y.S.2d 410). The error, the......