Summary
requiring objections "to the procedure followed in approving the appellant's waiver of jury trial [to be] preserved for review" in accordance with § 470.05
Summary of this case from Ballinger v. MillerOpinion
Argued October 17, 1980
Decided November 20, 1980
Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, LOUIS CIOFFI, J.
Bennett M. Lincoff and William E. Hellerstein for appellant.
Mario Merola, District Attorney (Kenneth R. Larywon and Timothy J. McGinn of counsel), for respondent.
MEMORANDUM.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
The issue raised with respect to the procedure followed in approving the appellant's waiver of jury trial was not preserved for review (CPL 470.05, subd 2). Moreover, quite apart from the lack of preservation, there is nothing on this record to afford a basis for determination of the question now raised for the first time. As the People correctly argue, the appellant's present claim that his participation in the waiver was not knowing and voluntary implicates his relationship with his trial attorney and is to be proved, if at all, by facts outside the trial record in a proceeding maintainable under CPL 440.10. That course was not pursued.
Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed.