Case ID: ad2d_242/html/0487-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert Smith, Appellant.
    [663 NYS2d 821]
   Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Obús, J.), rendered November 1, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first and second degrees, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 7V2 to 15 years and 4 to 8 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Questions of credibility were properly presented to the jury and we see no reason to disturb its findings (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94).

Defendant’s argument regarding the admission of a photograph of the coat stolen from the complainant is not preserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Graham, 186 AD2d 47, lv denied 80 NY2d 975), and we decline to reach it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that no prejudice inured to defendant as a result of either the decision to return the complainant’s coat to him on a cold evening in February, or the admission of a photograph of the coat at trial (People v Graham, supra, at 48; Penal Law § 450.10 [10]).

The Sandoval ruling was an appropriate exercise of discretion. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Wallach, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.