Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Daniel McDowell and Charles Dunleavy, Appellants
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1979-06-12
Citations: 47 N.Y.2d 858
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Daniel McDowell and Charles Dunleavy, Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 47
Pages: 858–860

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Daniel McDowell and Charles Dunleavy, Appellants.
Argued April 25, 1979;
decided June 12, 1979
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Arnold Nussbaum and Samuel Korb for appellant.
John J. Santucci, District Attorney (Aley Z. Alexander of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
While defendants did object at trial as to certain questions posed by the prosecutor to defendant McDowell on cross-examination, the objections taken were clearly predicated on the ground that the prosecutor was making improper factual assumptions in the questions, and not that, as now argued, the nature of the questions themselves unduly prejudiced defendants. As the record reveals, on numerous occasions the prosecutor inquired of McDowell whether he had heard prosecution witnesses make certain statements at trial, yet no objection was taken. Defendants having failed to properly state to the trial court the grounds for their objections or object to this line of questioning, this issue is not preserved for our review.
We have considered such of defendants' remaining contentions as were preserved for appellate review and have found them to be without merit.
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Fuchsberg concur.
Order affirmed in a memorandum.