Sherman Rivers was accused of trying to sell a piece of real estate which he didn't really own and, in order deliver the building vacant, supposedly paid some thugs to burn the place down.
Even though the Kings County Supreme Court allowed the prosecutor to ask some improper questions during the course of the criminal trial, the Appellate Division, Second Department, still affirmed Rivers's conviction on three counts of arson in the first degree.
Not only did it find the trial judge's error to be "harmless," but the evidence against Rivers was so "overwhelming" that it thought he wouldn't have been acquitted in any event. (But due to a sentence related discrepancy, the AD2 directed that the guy be resentenced.)
The hungry judges soon the sentence sign....
To view a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: People v. Rivers