Case ID: ny-2d_86/html/0869-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[658 NE2d 1041, 635 NYS2d 168]
    The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Carlos Santos, Appellant.
    Decided October 31, 1995
    
      APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    
      Susan Epstein, New York City, and Daniel L. Greenberg for appellant.
    
      Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney of Bronx County, Bronx (Robert L. Moore of counsel), for respondent.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

The issue presented on appeal is whether a defendant’s general motion to dismiss for insufficiency after the People have rested in a Bench trial raises a question of law. This Court has held that a specific objection is required to preserve sufficiency of the evidence claims for appellate review in jury trials (People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10; see, People v Bynum, 70 NY2d 858). There is no material difference between jury and nonjury trials in this respect and no practical reason why the Gray-Bynum rule should not apply to both Bench and jury trials. To the extent our holding conflicts with People v Nixon (248 NY 182), that decision is overruled.

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.