Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Bruce J. Adams, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2017-06-22
Citations: 151 A.D.3d 612
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Bruce J. Adams, Appellant.
Judges: Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Moskowitz and Gische, JJ.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 151
Pages: 612–613

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Bruce J. Adams, Appellant.
[54 NYS3d 292]

Opinion:
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ruth Pickholz, J.), rendered May 3, 2011, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of eight years, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant's challenge to the admission of hearsay at trial is unpreserved, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. In any event, given the overwhelming evidence of defendant's guilt, any error in admitting the hearsay statement was harmless (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230 [1975]).
Defendant was not deprived of a fair trial by a summation comment by the prosecutor that invited the jury to speculate about matters not in evidence, because the court's extensive curative instructions, which were given at defendant's request, and which the jury is presumed to have followed, were sufficient to prevent any prejudice. Moreover, given the overwhelming evidence, any error was harmless.
Defendant's request, made after the trial prosecutor had already made his sentencing recommendation, to have the prosecutor recused from sentencing for alleged personal bias, was untimely and without merit. In any event, the only remedy sought by defendant on appeal is a reduction of sentence in the interest of justice. However, we perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.
Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Moskowitz and Gische, JJ.