Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

PEOPLE v. ARZON

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Jun 17, 1991
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that he was denied his right to a fair trial by the trial court's failure to give a limiting instruction to the jury with regard to the People's use of his prior crimes is not preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467; People v Yates, 160 A.D.2d 1036). We decline to exercise our interest of justice discretion in view of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 242; People v Yates, supra).

Contrary to the defendant's contention, we find that he was not denied a fair trial by prosecutorial misconduct during the People's summation. After the defendant objected to the prosecutor's allegedly improper comment, the court gave the jury a curative instruction. Since the defendant failed to request any further ameliorative action, "it must be assumed that any defect was cured to the defense counsel's satisfaction" (People v Shaw, 150 A.D.2d 626, 627, citing People v Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951, 953; see also, CPL 470.05). In any event, the prosecutor's remarks were fair comment on the evidence (see, People v Pugliese, 131 A.D.2d 789, 790; People v Brown, 124 A.D.2d 667, 668). Thompson, J.P., Bracken, Eiber and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.