Legal Opinion
People v. Romero
New York Court of Appeals
Decided December 19, 2006PublishedCited by 276 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorándum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Defendant argues that various comments by the prosecutor during his summation were improper and deprived him of a fair trial. Most of the remarks identified by defendant on appeal are unreviewable because they went unchallenged at trial (see e.g. People v Tardbania, 72 NY2d 852, 853 [1988]), were met with only unspecified, general objections (see e.g. People v Harris, 98 NY2d 452, 491 n 18 [2002]; People v Tonge, 93 NY2d 838, 839-840 [1999]), or were raised for the first time in a postsummations mistrial…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People v. LaValleNew York Court of Appeals · 2004
- People v. TongeNew York Court of Appeals · 1999
- People v. HarrisNew York Court of Appeals · 2002
- People v. TardbaniaNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
3Cited by276 opinions
- People v. SalnaveAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- People v. BajanaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. SimmonsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- People v. RoscherAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. BirotAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
271 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.