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. ROBERT PEARSON, Appellant.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the prosecutor's statements in summation deprived him of a fair trial is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v. Tonge, 93 NY2d 838; People v. Almonte, 23 AD3d 392, lv denied 6 NY3d 831 [2006]), and in any event, is without merit. Although some of the prosecutor's statements in summation raised improper arguments that the defendant had a propensity to drive stolen cars in a reckless manner ( see People v. Collins, 12 AD3d 33, 39-40 [2004]; People v. Hill, 193 AD2d 619), these statements were harmless error, as the evidence of the defendant's guilt was overwhelming ( see People v. Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230; People v. Liriano, 27 AD3d 578).

The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v. Suitte, 90 AD2d 80, 85).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. PEARSON
(May 9, 2006)