Jim Ritts and improper summations
Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 1:52 pm
272 A.D.2d 866
Supreme Court, Appellate Division,
Fourth Department, New York.
PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff–Respondent,
v.
Julius WARE, Defendant–Appellant.
May 10, 2000.
Attorneys and Law Firms
Scott P. Falvey, Canandaigua, for Defendant-Appellant.
James B. Ritts, Canandaigua, for Plaintiff-Respondent.
"....we express our strong disapproval of the comment by the prosecutor that, if being drunk was a defense, he would have to lay off half of his staff...."
Supreme Court, Appellate Division,
Fourth Department, New York.
PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff–Respondent,
v.
Julius WARE, Defendant–Appellant.
May 10, 2000.
Attorneys and Law Firms
Scott P. Falvey, Canandaigua, for Defendant-Appellant.
James B. Ritts, Canandaigua, for Plaintiff-Respondent.
"....we express our strong disapproval of the comment by the prosecutor that, if being drunk was a defense, he would have to lay off half of his staff...."