People v. Rojas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rojas

258 A.D.2d 429, 683 N.Y.S.2d 515

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 12, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 258 A.D.2d 429 (People v. Rojas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Rojas, 258 A.D.2d 429, 683 N.Y.S.2d 515 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Micki Scherer, J.), rendered February 13, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as second felony offender, to a term of 5V2 to 11 years, unanimously affirmed.

[430]*430The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues concerning the reliability of identification testimony were properly presented to the jury and we see no reason to disturb its determinations.

Since defendant failed to make an offer of proof, his claim that he should have been permitted to elicit from the arresting officer the address defendant gave at the time of his arrest is unpreserved (People v George, 67 NY2d 817), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Moreover, this claim is unreviewable because the People’s objection was sustained after an unrecorded bench conference, the substance of which was never placed on record (see, People v Kinchen, 60 NY2d 772). Were we to review this claim, we would find, to the extent the present record permits review, that the evidence was properly excluded as hearsay.

Defendant has failed to preserve his challenges to the prosecutor’s summation, and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them. Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Nardelli, Tom and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Micki Scherer, J.), rendered February 13, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as second felony offender, to a term of 5V2 to 11 years, unanimously affirmed.

[430]*430The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues concerning the reliability of identification testimony were properly presented to the jury and we see no reason to disturb its determinations.

Since defendant failed to make an offer of proof, his claim that he should have been permitted to elicit from the arresting officer the address defendant gave at the time of his arrest is unpreserved (People v George, 67 NY2d 817), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Moreover, this claim is unreviewable because the People’s objection was sustained after an unrecorded bench conference, the substance of which was never placed on record (see, People v Kinchen, 60 NY2d 772). Were we to review this claim, we would find, to the extent the present record permits review, that the evidence was properly excluded as hearsay.

Defendant has failed to preserve his challenges to the prosecutor’s summation, and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them. Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Nardelli, Tom and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 A.D.2d 429, 683 N.Y.S.2d 515, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rojas-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack