AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Ronald CARTER, appellant.

Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Ronald Zapata of counsel), for appellant. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, and Kayonia L. Whetstone of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Buchter, J.), rendered September 4, 2013, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that certain comments made by the prosecutor during his opening statement and summation were improper and deprived him of a fair trial is largely unpreserved for appellate review, because he either failed to object, or made only general objections, to most of the challenged remarks ( see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Johnson, 127 A.D.3d 1234, 5 N.Y.S.3d 902; People v. Terry, 122 A.D.3d 882, 996 N.Y.S.2d 362; People v. Philips, 120 A.D.3d 1266, 992 N.Y.S.2d 104). In any event, the challenged remarks were fair comment on the evidence and the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom ( see People v. Ramrattan, 126 A.D.3d 1013, 6 N.Y.S.3d 131; People v. Williams, 123 A.D.3d 1152, 997 N.Y.S.2d 499; see also People v. Vargas, 168 A.D.2d 317, 562 N.Y.S.2d 650), fair response to the defense summation ( see People v. Johnson, 127 A.D.3d 1234, 5 N.Y.S.3d 902), or do not otherwise require reversal ( see People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396, 399, 446 N.Y.S.2d 9, 430 N.E.2d 885; People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105, 109–110, 383 N.Y.S.2d 204, 347 N.E.2d 564; People v. Rivera, 128 A.D.3d 857, 9 N.Y.S.3d 119; People v. Philips, 120 A.D.3d 1266, 992 N.Y.S.2d 104).

Further, defense counsel's failure to object, or object specifically, to most of the challenged comments did not deprive the defendant of the effective assistance of counsel ( see People v. Williams, 123 A.D.3d 1152, 997 N.Y.S.2d 499; People v. Wallace, 123 A.D.3d 1151, 997 N.Y.S.2d 756; People v. Ervin, 118 A.D.3d 910, 912, 987 N.Y.S.2d 454).

ENG, P.J., HALL, HINDS–RADIX and LaSALLE, JJ., concur.
Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

People v. Carter
(Jul 29, 2015)