From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Oakley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 21, 1985
114 A.D.2d 473 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

October 21, 1985

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Fuchs, J.).


Judgment affirmed.

Since defendant did not object to any of the comments made by the prosecutor at the trial, no error of law was preserved for appellate review (see, People v Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951). In any event, there was not such misconduct as to deny defendant a fair trial. The remark concerning the witness's lack of motivation to lie was a proper comment on his credibility, which was at issue on the trial (see, People v Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105). Nor was it improper to tell the jury that the prosecutor did not know the whereabouts of a potential witness since several times in his summation defense counsel had referred to the failure to call her (see, People v Marks, 6 N.Y.2d 67, cert denied 362 U.S. 912). The other comments were not so prejudicial as to cause the trial to be unfair, especially in light of the overwhelming evidence against defendant (cf. People v Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396). Bracken, J.P., Weinstein, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Oakley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 21, 1985
114 A.D.2d 473 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

People v. Oakley

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. OSEE OAKLEY, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 21, 1985

Citations

114 A.D.2d 473 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Citing Cases

People v. Woods

On the record before us we are satisfied that the court had before it sufficient facts so as to justify the…

People v. Washington

The defendant's challenges with respect to the trial court's charge and the prosecutor's summation are either…