Case ID: ny-2d_84/html/0879-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[644 NE2d 1342, 620 NYS2d 786]
    The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Antonio Tevaha, Appellant.
    Decided October 20, 1994
    
      APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    
      Laura Burde, New York City, and Philip L. Weinstein for appellant.
    
      Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney of New York County, New York City (Daniel A. Lowenthal, III, and Joseph J. Dawson of counsel), for respondent.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. Defendant’s sole claim of error — that he was denied a fair

trial when the court permitted testimony by the arresting officer regarding the general practices of drug sellers — has not been preserved for our review. Defense counsel simply made a general objection when the testimony was proffered, and failed to advise the trial court that the present claimed error was the basis for his objection. The word "objection” alone was insufficient to preserve the issue for our review (see, People v Fleming, 70 NY2d 947, 948; People v West, 56 NY2d 662, 663).

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.