Opinion
December 28, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Zweibel, J.).
Ordered that the judgment, as amended, is affirmed.
The defendant was convicted, inter alia, of committing acts of sexual abuse over the course of several months against four of his nieces, three of whom were sisters. The defendant contends that the trial court improperly admitted the testimony of the sisters' mother as evidence of the sisters' "prompt outcry". However, since the record does not indicate that the defendant raised an objection to the admission of the testimony at trial, any claimed errors with respect thereto are unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Osuna, 65 N.Y.2d 822; People v Bacchus, 175 A.D.2d 248, 249; People v Gomez, 112 A.D.2d 445, 446). The defendant similarly failed to object to the claimed errors regarding the "prompt outcry" testimony of the other niece's mother, and therefore any alleged errors with respect thereto are unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Osuna, supra; People v Bacchus, supra). Under the circumstances of this case, we find no basis to review the unpreserved issues in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.
Furthermore, the sentence imposed was neither harsh nor excessive (see, People v Delgado, 80 N.Y.2d 780). Rosenblatt, J.P., Ritter, Copertino and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.