PEOPLE v. MONEGRO

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Antonio MONEGRO, etc., Defendant-Appellant.

Decided: May 16, 2000

SULLIVAN, P.J., ROSENBERGER, NARDELLI, ELLERIN and WALLACH, JJ. Nisha M. Desai, for Respondent. Laura Burde, for Defendant-Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Michael Gross, J.), rendered November 5, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts), and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 8 years to life, 4 1/212 to 9 years and 4 1/212 to 9 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

 The challenged, isolated portions of the prosecutor's summation did not deprive defendant of a fair trial when viewed in context of the entire summation, the court's charge, and the overwhelming evidence of guilt (see, People v. D'Alessandro, 184 A.D.2d 114, 118-119, 591 N.Y.S.2d 1001, lv. denied 81 N.Y.2d 884, 597 N.Y.S.2d 945, 613 N.E.2d 977).   Upon defendant's objection that the prosecutor misstated the law, the court properly informed the jury that the comments were to be viewed as argument.

 The court's charge, when viewed as a whole, adequately conveyed the proper standards concerning the relationship between the permissive presumption contained in Penal Law § 220.25(2) and the burden of proof, and the court was not obligated to charge the language requested by defendant.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.