PEOPLE v. DORAN

Reset A A Font size: Print

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

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Antoine D. DORAN, appellant.

Decided: August 16, 2004

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., HOWARD MILLER, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, and PETER B. SKELOS, JJ. Kimberly L. Detherage, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Collette Borom Carpenter of counsel), for appellant. Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Keith Dolan of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), rendered December 4, 2001, convicting him attempted murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court providently exercised its discretion in its Sandoval ruling (see People v. Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371, 357 N.Y.S.2d 849, 314 N.E.2d 413;  People v. Antonelli, 6 A.D.3d 543, 774 N.Y.S.2d 396;  People v. Stevenson, 5 A.D.3d 405, 771 N.Y.S.2d 908).

In addition, there is no merit to the defendant's contention that certain alleged prosecutorial misconduct warrants reversal of his conviction.   This claim is largely unpreserved for appellate review, as the defendant failed to object in a number of instances to the alleged prosecutorial misconduct, or he made only general objections, and failed to request curative instructions in instances where the trial court sustained his general objections (see CPL 470.05[2];  People v. White, 5 A.D.3d 511, 772 N.Y.S.2d 601;  People v. Smith, 298 A.D.2d 607, 748 N.Y.S.2d 694).   In any event, the challenged remarks and conduct, both individually and cumulatively, constituted harmless error in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 367 N.Y.S.2d 213, 326 N.E.2d 787;  People v. White, supra ).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

Copied to clipboard