Opinion
January 25, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County, Albert Williams, J., Juanita Bing Newton, J., Jay Gold, J.
Defendant's claims concerning the prosecutor's cross-examination of a defense witness regarding the witness's explanation for failing to notify the authorities prior to trial of the alleged exculpatory information he possessed, is not preserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review the claims, we would find them to be meritless. In light of, inter alia, the witness's relationship (friend and brother-in-law) with defendant and his obvious awareness of the alleged unfounded arrest, a proper foundation existed for the prosecutor's cross-examination of the witness (see, People v. Dawson, 50 N.Y.2d 311, 321).
The court also properly charged the jury that the defendant's admitted use of an alias upon arrest could imply a consciousness of guilt but that such evidence must be weighed cautiously (see, People v. Bennett, 79 N.Y.2d 464, 469-470).
Finally, since defendant violated the conditions imposed by the court upon his earlier plea bargain, the court was justified in imposing the sentence it did (see, People v. Outley, 80 N.Y.2d 702).
Concur — Carro, J.P., Ellerin, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.