People v. Corley

• Decision Date: 16 May 1988
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. John CORLEY, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 343

528 N.Y.S.2d 343

140 A.D.2d 536

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. John CORLEY, Appellant.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division,

Second Department.

May 16, 1988

Steven J. Kosstrin, Hempstead, for appellant. John J. Santucci, Dist. Atty., Kew Gardens (Seymour Roth, of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Balbach, J.), rendered October 3, 1985, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15[5] ). We find that, upon reviewing the entire charge, the court properly instructed the jury on reasonable doubt ( see, People v. Canty, 60 N.Y.2d 830, 469 N.Y.S.2d 693, 457 N.E.2d 800; People v. Yanik, 43 N.Y.2d 97, 400 N.Y.S.2d 778, 371 N.E.2d 497, on remand 63 A.D.2d 574, 404 N.Y.S.2d 633; People v. Blackshear, 112 A.D.2d 1044, 493 N.Y.S.2d 32, lv. denied 66 N.Y.2d 917, 498 N.Y.S.2d 1031, 489 N.E.2d 776; People v. Navarro, 104 A.D.2d 958, 480 N.Y.S.2d 575; People v. Cruz, 97 A.D.2d 518, 468 N.Y.S.2d 28). We also find the statements made by the prosecutor which the defendant contends constituted prosecutorial misconduct were either proper responses to the defense summation (see, People v. Street, 124 A.D.2d 841, 508 N.Y.S.2d 558, lv. denied 69 N.Y.2d 834, 513 N.Y.S.2d 1042, 506 N.E.2d 553; People v. Freeman, 123 A.D.2d 784, 507 N.Y.S.2d 259, appeal denied 69 N.Y.2d 711, 512 N.Y.S.2d 1037, 504 N.E.2d 405), properly cured by appropriate curative instructions ( People v. Arce, 42 N.Y.2d 179, 397 N.Y.S.2d 619, 366 N.E.2d 279), or not preserved for appellate review due to defense counsel's acquiesence in the curative instructions given by the court ( People v. Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951, 953, 441 N.Y.S.2d 442, 424 N.E.2d 276; People v. Jalah, 107 A.D.2d 762, 484 N.Y.S.2d 116). We have reviewed the defendant's remaining contentions and find that they are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit ( see, People v. Santana, 125 A.D.2d 427, 508 N.Y.S.2d 1010, ...