Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Carlos Prado, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2004-12-16
Citations: 4 N.Y.3d 725
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Carlos Prado, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 4
Pages: 725–730

Head Matter:
[823 NE2d 824, 790 NYS2d 418]
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Carlos Prado, Appellant.
Argued November 18, 2004;
decided December 16, 2004
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York City, for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn (Diane R. Eisner, Leonard Johlove and Anthea H Bruffee of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Defendant appeals his conviction following a bench trial for sexual abuse of his stepdaughter. With respect to the issue of alleged judicial bias that divided the Appellate Division, we agree with the majority that defendant's claim was unpreserved for appellate review (1 AD3d 533, 534 [2003]). Additionally, defendant's ineffectiveness of counsel claim—that his attorney failed to preserve an objection as to the lack of evidence corroborating his confession as required by CPL 60.50—is without merit. At the close of the evidence, defense counsel made a general motion to dismiss the counts charged, which the trial court denied. While this objection alone would not have been sufficient to preserve the issue for our review (see e.g. People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]), when coupled with the trial judge's specific findings as to corroboration, the question now on appeal was expressly decided by that court (see CPL 470.05).