People v. Malave, 2002-03109.
| Decision Date | 03 May 2004 |
| Docket Number | 2002-03109. |
| Citation | 2004 NY Slip Op 03589,7 A.D.3d 542,775 N.Y.S.2d 588 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANGEL MALAVE, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he was deprived of a fair trial as a result of the prosecutor's summation is unpreserved for appellate review. He either did not object to the remarks at issue, made only general one-word objections, or his objections were sustained without any further request for curative instructions (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Heide, 84 NY2d 943, 944 [1994]; People v Tevaha, 84 NY2d 879, 881 [1994]; People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951, 953 [1981]). Moreover, the defendant's motion for a mistrial, made after the completion of summations, was untimely and failed to preserve his contentions (see People v Morris, 148 AD2d 552 [1989]; People v Bruen, 136 AD2d 648, 649 [1988]).
In any event, the defendant's contentions are without merit. The prosecutor's summation can be evaluated fairly only in comparison to that of the defense (see People v Halm, 81 NY2d 819, 821 [1993]; People v McHarris, 297 AD2d 824, 825 [2002]). Analyzed in this context, the prosecutor's summation constituted a fair response to the defendant's closing argument which explicitly put his credibility at issue (see People v Allien, 302 AD2d 468, 469 [2003]; People v Lowery, 281 AD2d 491, 492 [2001]; People v Sinclair, 231 AD2d 926 [1996]; People v Russo, 201 AD2d 512, 513 [1994], affd 85 NY2d 872 [1995]). In addition, the prosecutor did not assert an unduly prejudicial "safe streets" argument (People v Tolliver, 267 AD2d 1007, 1008 [1999]; see People v Durecot, 224 AD2d 264, 265 [1996]).
The defendant's remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Westwood
...126 A.D.3d 803, 805, 5 N.Y.S.3d 271 [2015] ; People v. Read, 97 A.D.3d 702, 703, 947 N.Y.S.2d 614 [2012] ; People v. Malave, 7 A.D.3d 542, 542, 775 N.Y.S.2d 588 [2004] ).Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is modified by vacating the conviction of aggravated harassment in the second deg......
-
People v. McCall
...People v. Muniz, 44 A.D.3d 1074, 1075, 844 N.Y.S.2d 396; People v. Owens, 43 A.D.3d 1185, 1186, 842 N.Y.S.2d 94; People v. Malave, 7 A.D.3d 542, 775 N.Y.S.2d 588; People v. White, 5 A.D.3d 511, 772 N.Y.S.2d 601). The defendant's contentions that numerous other comments the prosecutor made d......
-
People v. Mallayev
...the prosecutor during summation deprived him of a fair trial is unpreserved for appellate review ( seeCPL 470.05[2]; People v. Malave, 7 A.D.3d 542, 542, 775 N.Y.S.2d 588) and, in any event, without merit ( see People v. Hutchinson, 106 A.D.3d 1105, 1105, 965 N.Y.S.2d 612; People v. McHarri......
-
People v. Read
...a general one-word objection, and his motion for a mistrial, made after the completion of summations, was untimely ( see People v. Malave, 7 A.D.3d 542, 775 N.Y.S.2d 588;People v. Davis, 272 A.D.2d 408, 707 N.Y.S.2d 906;People v. Bruen, 136 A.D.2d 648, 649, 523 N.Y.S.2d 883). In any event, ......