People v. Velsor
This text of 73 A.D.3d 819 (People v. Velsor) 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.
Opinion
Appeal by the de[820]*820fendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Gavrin, J.), rendered June 30, 2008, convicting him of burglary in the first degree, robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (four counts), and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s contention that certain testimony constituted inadmissible hearsay is not preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Velez, 64 AD3d 621, 622 [2009]; People v Ketteles, 62 AD3d 902, 905 [2009]; People v Bryan, 50 AD3d 1049, 1050 [2008]; People v Antongiorgi, 242 AD2d 578 [1997]; People v Merchant, 150 AD2d 730, 731 [1989]). In any event, the defendant’s contention is without merit (see People v Walker, 70 AD3d 870, 871 [2010]; People v Chandler, 59 AD3d 562, 562 [2009]; People v Arrington, 158 AD2d 461 [1990]).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).
The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, do not require reversal. Skelos, J.P., Angiolillo, Leventhal and Roman, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
73 A.D.3d 819, 899 N.Y.S.2d 663, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-velsor-nyappdiv-2010.