People v. Dubois
| Decision Date | 16 February 1988 |
| Citation | 524 N.Y.S.2d 795,137 A.D.2d 706 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. James DUBOIS, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Philip L. Weinstein, New York City (Lawrence K. Marks, of counsel), for appellant.
Elizabeth Holtzman, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Barbara D. Underwood, Sholom J. Twersky and Deborah Sachs, of counsel), for respondent.
Before BROWN, J.P., and RUBIN, EIBER and SULLIVAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lagana, J.), rendered April 26, 1984, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), and robbery in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
It was error for the trial court to allow a police officer to testify that he arrested the defendant after a conversation with a codefendant who did not testify at trial ( People v. Felder, 108 A.D.2d 869, 870, 485 N.Y.S.2d 576; People v. Cruz, 100 A.D.2d 882, 883, 474 N.Y.S.2d 142). However, the error was unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, was harmless in light of the strong identification testimony by the two victims ( People v. Johnson, 57 N.Y.2d 969, 970, 457 N.Y.S.2d 230, 443 N.E.2d 478; People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 242, 367 N.Y.S.2d 213, 326 N.E.2d 787).
The defendant failed to object to the jury charge at trial, and thus his claim regarding the reasonable doubt standard was also not preserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05 People v. De Mauro, 48 N.Y.2d 892, 893, 424 N.Y.S.2d 884, 400 N.E.2d 1336; People v. Reed, 120 A.D.2d 552, 553, 502 N.Y.S.2d 48). In any event, it is clear that the charge as a whole conveyed the proper standard to the jury ( People v. Fisher, 112 A.D.2d 378, 491 N.Y.S.2d 833).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Brazzeal
...the inference that Greene, Rogers and Springer identified the defendant as one of the perpetrators, was improper (see, People v. Dubois, 137 A.D.2d 706, 524 N.Y.S.2d 795; People v. Cummings, 109 A.D.2d 748, 750, 485 N.Y.S.2d 847; People v. Tufano, 69 A.D.2d 826, 415 N.Y.S.2d 42). Moreover, ......
-
People v. Mason
...326 N.E.2d 787) in view of the overwhelming evidence of guilt ( see, People v. Grant, 133 A.D.2d 466, 519 N.Y.S.2d 682; People v. Dubois, 137 A.D.2d 706, 524 N.Y.S.2d 795). The defendant also argues that he was deprived of a fair trial by the statements of the prosecutor during summation. W......
-
People v. Singleton
...992; People v. Anthony, 179 A.D.2d 765, 579 N.Y.S.2d 1011; People v. Caldwell, 147 A.D.2d 581, 537 N.Y.S.2d 874; People v. Dubois, 137 A.D.2d 706, 524 N.Y.S.2d 795; People v. Cummings, 109 A.D.2d 748, 485 N.Y.S.2d 847). In any event, any error was harmless in view of the overwhelming eviden......
-
People v. Williams
...992; People v. Anthony, 179 A.D.2d 765, 579 N.Y.S.2d 1011; People v. Caldwell, 147 A.D.2d 581, 537 N.Y.S.2d 874; People v. Dubois, 137 A.D.2d 706, 524 N.Y.S.2d 795; People v. Cummings, 109 A.D.2d 748, 485 N.Y.S.2d 847). In any event, any error was harmless in view of the overwhelming eviden......