From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Calderon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 23, 1998
251 A.D.2d 207 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

June 23, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Mary McGowan Davis, J.).


Defendant's contention that the prosecutor improperly elicited implied hearsay testimony is unpreserved for appellate review and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the testimony provided relevant background information explaining the police officers actions ( see, People v. Li, 238 A.D.2d 277).

Defendant's claim that the court did not meaningfully respond to a jury note regarding whether more than one person could constructively possess the gun recovered from the van in which defendant was seated is also unpreserved for appellate review and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the court's affirmative response meaningfully answered the jury's inquiry.

Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Tom and Saxe, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Calderon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 23, 1998
251 A.D.2d 207 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Calderon

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. EFRAIN CALDERON…

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

Date published: Jun 23, 1998

Citations

251 A.D.2d 207 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
675 N.Y.S.2d 860

Citing Cases

People v. Singletary

The general objection of defendant to that testimony did not preserve his present contention for our review (…

People v. Brown

The trial court properly charged the statutory presumption contained in Penal Law § 220.25 (2) ( see, People…