Case Detail
CitationPeople v. Ubiles, 539 N.Y.S.2d 233 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
CrimeMurder
StateNY
Pros. First NameUKN
Pros. Last NameUKN
FederalNo
Trial YearUKN
BodyAppeals court
OpinionThe New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, held that the prosecutor's improper summation comment on defendant's request for an attorney did not result in denial of due process, and error arising from prosecutor's improper and highly prejudicial conduct of insinuating that defendant's husband was guilty of perjury and that husband's claim of language problem was concocted by defense counsel was harmless: "A prosecutor may not comment on a defendant's request for an attorney during summation when, as here, his only apparent purpose is to create an inference of consciousness of guilt [citations omitted]. Although the prosecutor's comments here were clearly improper, defense counsel's objection was sustained and a curative instruction was given; there was no denial of due process . . .The prosecutor also erred in insinuating that defendant's husband was guilty of perjury [citations omitted] and that his claim of a language problem was concocted by defense counsel [citations omitted]. This type of conduct by an experienced prosecutor is not only improper and highly prejudical, but it also borders on the contemptuous and clearly contravenes numerous decisions from this court and the Court of Appeals concerning the duty of a prosecutor to present competent evidence fairly and temperately [citations omitted]. . .We note that the prosecutor was improperly allowed to cross-examine defendant's character witnesses on their personal opinions of defendant's character."
Determination Year1989
Misconduct TypeTR: Impugning
TR: Inadmissible
C/S EffectNo effect
Pros. Misc. ReportedUKN
SanctionsUKN
Sanction TypeUKN
Web linkhttp://www.leagle.com/decision/19891150148AD2d1002_2528