People v Williams
2008 NY Slip Op 05953
Decided on June 24, 2008
Appellate Division, Second Department
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on June 24, 2008
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P.
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO
DAVID S. RITTER
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, JJ.

2002-02248
(Ind. No. 480/98)

[*1]The People, etc., respondent,

v

Wykim Williams, appellant. Scott Brettschneider, Uniondale, N.Y. (Randall D. Unger of counsel), for appellant.





Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (Gary
Fidel and Donna Aldea of counsel), for respondent.


DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kron, J.), rendered March 23, 2000, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Rosengarten, J.), of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contentions that he was illegally detained and that the showup identification was unduly suggestive are without merit (see People v Worthy, 308 AD2d 555). The defendant's contention that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel is also without merit. A review of the circumstances in totality as of the time of the representation reveals that the defendant was afforded meaningful representation (see People v Henry, 95 NY2d 563, 565, cert denied 547 US 1040; People v Haggerty, 48 AD3d 480).

The defendant's remaining contentions alleging prosecutorial misconduct in the course of summation are, with the exception of the claim that the prosecutor improperly vouched for the credibility of the witnesses, unpreserved for appellate review. The defendant's contention that the prosecutor improperly vouched for witnesses is without merit. The prosecutor's statements were fair comments in response to the summation by defense counsel (see People v Barnes, 33 AD3d 811, 812).
MASTRO, J.P., SPOLZINO, RITTER and LEVENTHAL, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.