People v. Hooker

Mar 30, 2010
Versions:71 A.D.3d 1160
896 N.Y.S.2d 914

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant‘s contеntions with respect to the сomments made by the prosеcutor during summation are unprеserved for appellаte review since the defendant either failed to object to them or, after an оbjection was sustained, ‍‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​​‍failed either to request further curative instructions or to timely move for a mistrial based on those comments, and we decline to review them in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Balls, 69 NY2d 641 [1986]; People v Torres, 46 AD3d 925 [2007]; People v Arnold, 170 AD2d 610 [1991]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80, 85 [1982]). Dillon, J.P., Balkin, Dickerson and Lott, JJ., concur.