AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
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
Attorney(S)
Judges

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. VINH DINH, Appellant.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contentions that the prosecutor engaged in misconduct both while cross-examining him and during his summation are unpreserved for appellate review ( see People v Williams, 8 NY3d 854, 855; People v Booth, 265 AD2d 485, 486). In any event, the complained-of questioning fell within the bounds of proper cross-examination ( see People v Overlee, 236 AD2d 133, 138, 139; People v Caicedo, 173 AD2d 630, 631). Likewise, most of the prosecutor's summation constituted "fair comment upon the evidence or a fair response to the defense summation" ( People v White, 5 AD3d 511, 511), and any improper comments constituted harmless error ( see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 241-242).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. DINH
(Feb 9, 2010)