From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Oglesby

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 17, 2004
776 N.Y.S.2d 838 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2002-10983.

Decided May 17, 2004.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gerges, J.), rendered November 6, 2002, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree (three counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Tonya Plank of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Jodi L. Mandel, and Marie-Claude P. Wrenn of counsel), for respondent.

Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, HOWARD MILLER, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that certain remarks made by the prosecutor during summation warrant reversal of his conviction ( see CPL 470.05; People v. Scotti, 220 A.D.2d 543). In any event, while we agree that some of the challenged remarks were improper, they did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial and do not warrant reversal of the judgment in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction ( see People v. Bryant, 163 A.D.2d 406, 407; People v. Samuel, 122 A.D.2d 285, 286; cf. People v. Smith, 288 A.D.2d 496, 497).

RITTER, J.P., SMITH, H. MILLER and GOLDSTEIN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Oglesby

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 17, 2004
776 N.Y.S.2d 838 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

People v. Oglesby

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. LARSELLA OGLESBY, appellant

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

Date published: May 17, 2004

Citations

776 N.Y.S.2d 838 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
7 A.D.3d 736

Citing Cases

People v. Williams

05; People v. Scotti, 220 AD2d 543). In any event, while some of the challenged remarks may have been…

People v. Trinidad

In any event, the defendant's contention is without merit. Although the prosecutor, on more than one occasion…