People v. Slater

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Slater

222 A.D.2d 236, 636 N.Y.S.2d 611, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12724

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

DecidedDecember 7, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 222 A.D.2d 236 (People v. Slater) 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. Slater, 222 A.D.2d 236, 636 N.Y.S.2d 611, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12724 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jerome Hornblass, J.), rendered November 10, 1992, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 41/2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s arguments concerning the People’s rebuttal testimony are unpreserved for appellate review, no objection having been made to its admission (see, People v Acosta, 180 AD2d 505, 507-508, Iv denied 80 NY2d 827), and we decline to review them in the interest of Justice. If we were to review them, we would find that the rebuttal testimony was properly admitted, in the court’s discretion, to refute defendant’s testimony suggesting that he did not fit the description of the perpetrator (see, CPL 260.30 [7]; People v Harris, 57 NY2d 335, 345-346, cert denied 460 US 1047; People v Rojas, 200 AD2d 545, Iv denied 83 NY2d 857). Defendant’s claim that the court failed to respond to a jury note cannot be reviewed, on this direct appeal, in the absence of factual record which it was defendant’s burden to provide (see, People v Kinchen, 60 NY2d 772; People v Church, 217 AD2d 444, 445; People v Roman, 217 AD2d 494). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Ross, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jerome Hornblass, J.), rendered November 10, 1992, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 41/2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s arguments concerning the People’s rebuttal testimony are unpreserved for appellate review, no objection having been made to its admission (see, People v Acosta, 180 AD2d 505, 507-508, Iv denied 80 NY2d 827), and we decline to review them in the interest of Justice. If we were to review them, we would find that the rebuttal testimony was properly admitted, in the court’s discretion, to refute defendant’s testimony suggesting that he did not fit the description of the perpetrator (see, CPL 260.30 [7]; People v Harris, 57 NY2d 335, 345-346, cert denied 460 US 1047; People v Rojas, 200 AD2d 545, Iv denied 83 NY2d 857). Defendant’s claim that the court failed to respond to a jury note cannot be reviewed, on this direct appeal, in the absence of factual record which it was defendant’s burden to provide (see, People v Kinchen, 60 NY2d 772; People v Church, 217 AD2d 444, 445; People v Roman, 217 AD2d 494). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Ross, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

222 A.D.2d 236, 636 N.Y.S.2d 611, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12724, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-slater-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack