midpage

People v. NegronPeople v. Negron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Jun 26, 2007
Versions:41 A.D.3d 865
837 N.Y.S.2d 586

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant‘s challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 19 [1995]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant‘s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v Lewis, 64 NY2d 1111, 1112 [1985]).

The defendant‘s challenges to the prosecutor‘s summation comments are unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Balls, 69 NY2d 641 [1986]) and, in any event, without merit. The defendant also failed to preserve for appellate review his claim that the Supreme Court improperly interfered with the examination of witnesses (see People v Charleston, 56 NY2d 886, 887 [1982]; People v Perez, 30 AD3d 542 [2006]; People v Bembury, 14 AD3d 575, 576 [2005]). In any event, the court‘s participation was not improper (see People v Mills, 212 AD2d 550 [1995]).

Contrary to the defendant‘s contention, the defense counsel provided meaningful representation (see People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]). Florio, J.P., Fisher, Carni and McCarthy, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: People v. Negron
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Jun 26, 2007
Citations: 41 A.D.3d 865; 837 N.Y.S.2d 586
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
Log In