| People v Brown |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 06320 [76 AD3d 532] |
| August 3, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Glendon Brown, Appellant. |
—[*1] Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Sholom J. Twersky,and Bruce Alderman of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mullen, J.),rendered June 26, 2007, convicting him of rape in the second degree (two counts), sexual abusein the third degree (two counts), and endangering the welfare of a child, upon a jury verdict, andimposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court did not improvidently exercise itsdiscretion in denying his motion for a mistrial. The decision to declare a mistrial rests within thesound discretion of the trial court, which is in the best position to determine if this drasticremedy is necessary to protect the defendant's right to a fair trial (see Matter of Plummer vRothwax, 63 NY2d 243, 250 [1984]; People v Way, 69 AD3d 964, 965 [2010]; People v Hernandez, 11 AD3d479 [2004]; People v Knorr, 284 AD2d 411, 412 [2001]). Here, while thechallenged testimony was improper (seegenerally People v Arafet, 13 NY3d 460, 464-465 [2009]; People v Vargas, 88NY2d 856, 858 [1996]; People v Molineux, 168 NY 264 [1901]), any prejudice resultingtherefrom was alleviated by the trial court's actions in immediately striking the testimony fromthe record and providing a curative instruction to the jury (see People v Way, 69 AD3dat 965; People v Benloss, 60 AD3d686, 687 [2009]; People v Lockhart, 220 AD2d 690, 691 [1995]). Prudenti, P.J.,Rivera, Santucci and Miller, JJ., concur.