From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Bowels

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 16, 1995
220 A.D.2d 605 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

October 16, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the trial court improperly marshaled the evidence in its charge to the jury. Since the defendant failed to object to the charge now claimed to have been improper, her claim is unpreserved for appellate review and we decline to reach it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction ( see, CPL 470.05).

The defendant also asserts that the court erred in admitting her arrest photographs into evidence. As the appearance of the defendant at trial was dramatically different from that at the time of the crime and as the photographs corroborated trial testimony, the court properly admitted the photographs into evidence ( see, People v. Pobliner, 32 N.Y.2d 356, rearg denied 33 N.Y.2d 657, cert denied 416 U.S. 905; People v. Lakram, 207 A.D.2d 360, lv denied 84 N.Y.2d 1034, cert denied ___ US ___, 116 S Ct 235). Rosenblatt, J.P., Miller, Ritter and Friedmann, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Bowels

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 16, 1995
220 A.D.2d 605 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Bowels

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DONNA BOWELS, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 16, 1995

Citations

220 A.D.2d 605 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
632 N.Y.S.2d 620

Citing Cases

State of N.Y. v. Pedro

In addition, the defendant's contention that the court made errors in its charge on the counts of criminal…

People v. Schultz

The defendant's contention that he was prejudiced by the use of his arrest photograph at trial is without…