People v. Deas

150 A.D.3d 876, 51 N.Y.S.3d 899

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowling, J.), rendered June 2, 2014, convicting her of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the Supreme Court improperly allowed the People to present a courtroom demonstration, during which one of the prosecutors and the complainant demonstrated for the jury the interaction between the defendant and the complainant, is unpreserved for appellate review, since the defendant’s objections at trial were based upon grounds different than those raised on appeal (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Rodriguez, 73 AD3d 815, 815 [2010]; People v Clas, 54 AD3d 770, 771 [2008]; People v Saladana, 208 AD2d 872, 872-873 [1994]). In any event, the court providently exercised its discretion in permitting the in-court demonstration (see People v Barnes, 80 NY2d 867, 868 [1992]; People v McDaniel, 84 AD3d 1410, 1411 [2011]; People v Jones, 70 AD3d 1253, 1255 [2010]).

Mastro, J.P., Leventhal, Hall and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Deas, 150 A.D.3d 876, 51 N.Y.S.3d 899 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

150 A.D.3d 876 (People v. Deas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Barnes
80 N.Y.2d 867 (New York Court of Appeals, 1992)
People v. Clas
54 A.D.3d 770 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
People v. Jones
70 A.D.3d 1253 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Rodriguez
73 A.D.3d 815 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. McDaniel
84 A.D.3d 1410 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
People v. Saladana
208 A.D.2d 872 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)