People v. Johnson
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- People v. Prowse (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
- People v. George (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Silverman, J.), rendered April 13, 1999, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The court properly permitted the People to elicit testimony from a detective on redirect examination regarding the voucher numbers in his records. During cross-examination, the defense counsel questioned the detective about a discrepancy between the voucher numbers in his paperwork. This line of questioning afforded the People an opportunity to clarify and explain the discrepancy (see generally People v Melendez, 55 NY2d 445, 451 [1982]; People v Johnson, 296 AD2d 422 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 537 [2002]).
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the comments made by the prosecutor during summation do not require reversal. The alleged improper remarks were either a fair response to the defense counsel’s summation (see People v Stith, 291 AD2d 576 [2002]; People v Nelson, 288 AD2d 329 [2001]; People v Elliot, 216 AD2d 576 [1995]; People v Russo, 201 AD2d 512, 513 [1994], affd 85 NY2d 872 [1995]), or fair comment on the evidence and the inferences to be drawn therefrom (see People v McHarris, 297 AD2d 824, 825 [2002]). S. Miller, J.P., Krausman, Luciano and Mastro, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.