From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Horne

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 12, 2004
6 A.D.3d 549 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2001-05412.

Decided April 12, 2004.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mangano, J.), rendered June 14, 2001, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Jonathan Garvin of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Jane S. Meyers, Anne C. Feigus, and Christine Meding of counsel), for respondent.

Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, NANCY E. SMITH, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the prosecutor made improper statements during summation is without merit. The remarks in question were fair comment on the evidence ( see People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105), fair response to comments made by defense counsel during summation ( see People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396; People v. Ingram, 205 A.D.2d 801; People v. Ocasio, 180 A.D.2d 765; People v. Rivera, 171 A.D.2d 583; People v. Colon, 122 A.D.2d 151), or harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt and the court's subsequent instructions, which served to cure any prejudice to the defendant ( see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230; People v. Harrell, 270 A.D.2d 358; People v. Simms, 222 A.D.2d 622; People v. Ferrara, 220 A.D.2d 612; People v. Weaver, 183 A.D.2d 797, 798).

The defendant's contention that his adjudication as a persistent violent felony offender violated his right to a jury trial pursuant to Apprendi v. New Jersey ( 530 U.S. 466) is without merit ( see People v. Hyatt, 2 A.D.3d 749; People v. Rivera, 2 A.D.3d 543; People v. Quinones, 2 A.D.3d 541; People v. Grigg, 299 A.D.2d 367; People v. McKenzie, 298 A.D.2d 409; People v. Taylor, 294 A.D.2d 607.

The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, either are unpreserved for appellate review, waived, or without merit.

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, SMITH and RIVERA, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Horne

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 12, 2004
6 A.D.3d 549 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

People v. Horne

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. JAMEL HORNE, appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Apr 12, 2004

Citations

6 A.D.3d 549 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
774 N.Y.S.2d 401

Citing Cases

State of N.Y. v. Ekirby

05; People v Nieves, 2 AD3d 539, 540). In any event, the challenged remarks were within the bounds of fair…

People v. Smith

The defendant's contention that the prosecutor made statements during summation which deprived him of a fair…