Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

PEOPLE v. BILLUPS

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Jul 21, 2003
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.
DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the prosecutor's summation comment regarding the defendant's failure to call his former girlfriend as a witness did not, in light of the defendant's testimony, constitute an impermissible effort to shift the burden of proof ( see People v. Tankleff, 84 N.Y.2d 992, 994; People v. Rivera, 292 A.D.2d 549; see also People v. De Jesus, 42 N.Y.2d 519). While the prosecutor improperly implied during her summation that the defendant should have called someone named "Jimmy" as a witness, such error does not warrant reversal under the circumstances of this case ( see People v. Ayers, 214 A.D.2d 459; see also People v. De Jesus, supra).

FLORIO, J.P., FRIEDMANN, TOWNES and MASTRO, JJ., concur.