From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Bruckman

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 29, 1979
389 N.E.2d 1105 (N.Y. 1979)

Opinion

Argued January 12, 1979

Decided March 29, 1979

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, FRANK R. BAYGER, J.

Joseph A. Shifflett and Nathaniel A. Barrell for appellant.

Edward C. Cosgrove, District Attorney (John J. De Franks of counsel), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Inasmuch as defendant failed to object to the verdict as returned by the jury, his claim of repugnancy was not preserved for appellate review. (See People v Parks, 59 A.D.2d 543, 544; People v Incherchera, 56 A.D.2d 852; cf. Matter of Oliver v Justices of N.Y. Supreme Ct. of N.Y. County, 36 N.Y.2d 53, 58; People v Quilles, 48 A.D.2d 933.)

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER and FUCHSBERG concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.


Summaries of

People v. Bruckman

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 29, 1979
389 N.E.2d 1105 (N.Y. 1979)
Case details for

People v. Bruckman

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES DAVID BRUCKMAN…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 29, 1979

Citations

389 N.E.2d 1105 (N.Y. 1979)
389 N.E.2d 1105
416 N.Y.S.2d 585

Citing Cases

People v. Stahl

The contention that the verdicts of the jury were "repugnant" was not preserved for our review in consequence…

People v. Sanchez

Only after the jury was disbanded did defense counsel move to set aside the verdict in general terms "as…