AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ALBERT HOLLAND, Appellant.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

On appeal, the defendant contends that he was deprived of a fair trial by several allegedly improper comments made by the prosecutor during summation. However, since the defendant failed to raise any objection to two of the comments of which he now complains, and made only a general objection to a third remark, his present claims of error are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Dawson, 50 N.Y.2d 311, 324; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245, 250). In any event, for the most part the challenged remarks constituted a fair response to the defendant's summation, were within the four corners of the evidence, or were otherwise proper (see, People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105). The remaining comments were not so prejudicial as to warrant reversal, particularly in view of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 237; People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396). Balletta, J.P., Copertino, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. HOLLAND
(May 9, 1994)