Summary
In Rullo, the court stated as follows (p 895): "Although it was error to receive in evidence during the People's case-in-chief that portion of defendant's Grand Jury testimony in which he acknowledged a prior conviction, such portion of the transcript of his Grand Jury testimony could have been redacted, and the error avoided, had defense counsel brought this matter to the attention of the trial court by means of a specific objection.
Summary of this case from People v. KratkyOpinion
Argued November 29, 1972
Decided December 28, 1972
Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, GEORGE J. BEISHEIM, JR., J.
Omar Z. Ghobashy for appellant.
Carl A. Vergari, District Attorney ( Janet Cunard and B. Anthony Morosco of counsel), for respondent.
Order affirmed in the following memorandum: Although it was error to receive in evidence during the People's case-in-chief that portion of defendant's Grand Jury testimony in which he acknowledged a prior conviction, such portion of the transcript of his Grand Jury testimony could have been redacted, and the error avoided, had defense counsel brought this matter to the attention of the trial court by means of a specific objection. The absence of a specific objection to the introduction of the prior conviction prevents this court from reviewing the issue. ( People v. McCormick, 31 N.Y.2d 807; cf. People v. Berrios, 28 N.Y.2d 361, 367.)
Concur: Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BREITEL, JASEN and GIBSON.