People v. Cruz

112 A.D.2d 6, 490 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50632
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Cruz. Read the opinion of the Court — 100 A.D.2d 882

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: With one exception, defense counsel did not object to the portions of the prosecutor’s cross-examination and summation and of the court’s charge now assigned as error. He has failed to preserve these issues for review and on this record we find no reason to reach them in the interest of justice (see, People v Thomas, 50 NY2d 467, 471, 473). The portion of the summation to which defendant objected and of which he now complains does not present reversible error. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Bergin, J. — burglary, second degree.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Doerr, Denman, O’Donnell and Schnepp, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

People v. Cruz, 112 A.D.2d 6, 490 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50632 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

112 A.D.2d 6 (People v. Cruz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Thomas
407 N.E.2d 430 (New York Court of Appeals, 1980)