People v. MitchellPeople v. Mitchell
While it was proper for the prosecutor to elicit testimony that the defendant attempted to procure a false alibi (see People v Moses, 63 NY2d 299, 308 [1984]), eliciting the witness‘s reason for agreeing to provide one was error (see People v Buzzi, 238 NY 390, 398-399 [1924]; cf. People v Myrick, 31 AD3d 668, 669 [2006]). However, such error was harmless, as there was overwhelming evidence of the defendant‘s guilt, and no significant probability that the error contributed to his conviction (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 241-242 [1975]).
Furthermore, the defendant‘s contention concerning a comment made by the prosecutor during summation is unpreserved for appellate review, as he raised only a general objection to the contested remark, failed to request curative instructions, and did not timely move for a mistrial on that ground (see
The defendant received the effective assistance of counsel (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712 [1998]).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).