Opinion
February 11, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Fisher, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that a reversal of his conviction is warranted because the trial court provided the jury with a verdict sheet which impermissibly described the elements of the crimes charged (see, People v Nimmons, 72 N.Y.2d 830) is not preserved for appellate review since he failed to object to its submission (see, CPL 470.05; People v Freeman, 162 A.D.2d 704; People v Mathis, 150 A.D.2d 613). Furthermore, reversal in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction is unwarranted (see, People v McClain, 168 A.D.2d 514; People v Comer, 163 A.D.2d 485).
The defendant's claim that he was prejudiced by the sentencing court's consideration of a pending indictment which was ultimately dismissed, is similarly unpreserved for appellate review and, under the circumstances, we choose not to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to reach the issue. Brown, J.P., Sullivan, Rosenblatt and Ritter, JJ., concur.