People v. Ferguson, 626 N.E.2d 930 (NY 1993). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Ferguson, 626 N.E.2d 930 (NY 1993). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
24 citation events (19 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: People v. Aguilar (Walter) (nyappterm, 2020-11-27)
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996 2011 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Aguilar (Walter)
N.Y. App. Term. · 2020 · confidence medium
We find that the Criminal Court's instruction to the jury to "disregard any testimony by [the] Police Officer . . . relating to a minimum speed limit on the road where the defendant was pulled over" was sufficient to ameliorate any prejudice and to ensure that defendant received a fair trial ( see People v Ferguson , 82 NY2d 837, 838 [1993]; People v Tebout , 179 AD3d 1099 [2020]; People v Murphy , 168 AD3d 880 [2019]), and the jury is presumed to have followed the court's instruction ( see People v Hunt , 172 AD3d 1888 , 1890 [2019]; People v Murphy, 168 AD3d at 881).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. White
N.Y. App. Div. · 2010 · confidence medium
The Supreme Court’s curative instruction was sufficient to ameliorate any prejudice and to ensure that the defendant received a fair trial (see People v Ferguson, 82 NY2d 837, 838 [1993]; People v Benloss, 60 AD3d 686, 687 [2009]; People v Wilson, 50 AD3d 711, 712 [2008]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Wilson
N.Y. App. Div. · 2008 · confidence medium
While the comment was improper (see People v Conyers, 52 NY2d 454 [1981]), any potential prejudice which may have resulted was remedied by the prompt action of the trial court in sustaining the defense counsel’s objection, striking the comment, and providing the jury with curative instructions to which the defendant assented (see People v Ferguson, 82 NY2d 837, 838 [1993]; People v Barnes, 80 NY2d 867, 868 [1992]; People v Hernandez, 11 AD3d 479 [2004]; People v Thomas, 8 AD3d 303 [2004]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Thomas
N.Y. App. Div. · 2004 · confidence medium
Their objections were sustained and prompt curative instructions were given which removed any possible prejudice to the defendants (see People v Ferguson, 82 NY2d 837, 838 [1993]; People v Greene, 298 AD2d 464 [2002]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Michael Ferguson, Appellant
New York Court of Appeals.
Nov 23, 1993.
626 N.E.2d 930
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, Mark Gimpel, New York City, and E. Joshua Rosenkranz for appellant., Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney of New York County, New York City (Alan Gadlin of counsel), for respondent.
Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Hancock, Jr., Bellacosa, Smith and Levine Concur.
Cited by 16 opinions  |  Published

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Where no formal demonstration of the defendant’s "handedness” had been presented during trial, the prosecutor’s remark to the jury during summation — "[y]ou have been here through the course of the trial and [have] seen [defendant] sitting there. Defendant takes notes with his left hand”— constituted an improper reference to facts not in evidence (see, People v Paperno, 54 NY2d 294, 300-301). Nonetheless, the court’s curative instruction, which directed the jurors to disregard the note-taking comment and clearly indicated that no evidence had been presented concerning whether defendant was left or right handed, was sufficient to ameliorate any prejudice and to ensure that defendant received a fair trial (People v Barnes, 80 NY2d 867, 868; see also, People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105, 111).

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Hancock, Jr., Bellacosa, Smith and Levine concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.