People v. Tiro

• Decision Date: 07 November 2012
• Citation: 2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 07326,100 A.D.3d 663,952 N.Y.S.2d 893
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Carlos TIRO, appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

100 A.D.3d 663

952 N.Y.S.2d 893

2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 07326

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,

v.Carlos TIRO, appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Nov. 7, 2012.

Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Allegra Glashausser of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Amy Appelbaum, and Jill Oziemblewski of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County *894(Guzman, J.), rendered November 4, 2010, convicting him of gang assault in the first degree, assault in the second degree (two counts), and attempted gang assault in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that he was deprived of a fair trial as a result of various comments made by the prosecutor and her use of slides as visual aids during summation is unpreserved for appellate review. The defendant either did not object to the comments and slides he now challenges, made only general objections, or “failed to request additional relief when the Supreme Court sustained objections or provided curative instructions” ( People v. Bajana, 82 A.D.3d 1111, 1112, 919 N.Y.S.2d 194;see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Heide, 84 N.Y.2d 943, 944, 620 N.Y.S.2d 814, 644 N.E.2d 1370;People v. Ahmed, 40 A.D.3d 869, 869, 836 N.Y.S.2d 640). In any event, the prosecutor's comments were either fair response to the remarks made by the defense counsel on summation ( see People v. Halm, 81 N.Y.2d 819, 821, 595 N.Y.S.2d 380, 611 N.E.2d 281;People v. Gonzalez, 11 A.D.3d 558, 782 N.Y.S.2d 812;People v. Malave, 7 A.D.3d 542, 775 N.Y.S.2d 588), or not so egregious as to have deprived the defendant of a fair trial ( see People v. Mullings, 83 A.D.3d 871, 872, 921 N.Y.S.2d 152;People v. Lewis, 72 A.D.3d 705, 707, 898 N.Y.S.2d 232;People v. Norman, 40 A.D.3d 1130, 1131, 837 N.Y.S.2d 277). Moreover, under the circumstances of this case, the prosecutor's use of slides as visual aids during summation did not prejudice the defendant or deprive him of a fair trial ( see generally People v. Baker, 14 N.Y.3d 266, 273–274, 899 N.Y.S.2d 733, 926 N.E.2d 240).

The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 85–86, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675).

RIVERA, J.P., ANGIOLILLO, CHAMBERS and ROMAN, JJ., concur.