People v. Vargas

• Citation: 559 N.Y.S.2d 631,163 A.D.2d 39
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Adriano VARGAS, Defendant-Appellant.
• Decision Date: 03 July 1990
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 631

559 N.Y.S.2d 631

163 A.D.2d 39

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Adriano VARGAS, Defendant-Appellant.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division,

First Department.

July 3, 1990

C. Welykyj, New York City, for respondent. J.M. Kratter, New York City, for defendant-appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Frederic S. Berman, J.), rendered January 9, 1989, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the first degree and robbery in the first and second degrees, and sentencing him to concurrent indeterminate terms of imprisonment of from eight to sixteen years on the burglary and robbery in the first degree counts and seven and one-half to fifteen years on the robbery in the second degree count, unanimously affirmed. After forcibly entering the complainants' apartment and threatening to kill them and their baby, defendant and another man stole $1,000 and other property. The complainants saw the defendant about one month later and the police arrested him. None of defendant's challenges to the prosecutor's summation comments are preserved for appellate review (CPL sec. 470.05[2], and we decline to reach them in the interests of justice. In any event, the prosecutor's remarks were proper comments on the evidence and directly responsive to defense counsel's summation. (See, People v. Bailey, 155 A.D.2d 262, 547 N.Y.S.2d 28; People v. Moran, 154 A.D.2d 322, 546 N.Y.S.2d 611.) In addition, an examination of the court's charge reveals that the court adequately conveyed the concept of reasonable doubt. (See, People v. Malloy, 55 N.Y.2d 296, 303, 449 N.Y.S.2d 168, 434 N.E.2d 237.)

SULLIVAN, J.P., and ROSENBERGER, ASCH and RUBIN, JJ., concur.