Opinion
January 25, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Budd Goodman, J.).
This prosecution arises out of an attempted street robbery. There is nothing incredible about the victim's trial testimony as compared to his statement to the police on the evening of the incident. Any discrepancies were presented to the jury for its consideration (People v. Mosley, 112 A.D.2d 812, 814, affd 67 N.Y.2d 985), and defendant presents no reason to disturb the jury's verdict of guilt.
In marshaling the evidence, the trial court's charge does not present any grounds for reversal. No objection was taken to this aspect of the charge. Therefore, this issue is not preserved for review (CPL 470.05), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to consider the issue, we would find that the charge was proper. The court fairly marshaled the evidence and did not violate CPL 300.10 (2). Both sides of the case were presented to the jury in an accurate and unbiased manner.
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Wallach, Smith and Rubin, JJ.