Legal Opinion

People v. Westcott

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided February 26, 1990PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The defendant claims that he was deprived of his rights of confrontation and due process as a result of the admission of certain "indirect hearsay” from which the jury could have drawn incriminating inferences. However, since the defendant failed to raise any objection to the court’s curative instructions concerning the hearsay statements or to the testimony elicited thereafter, which he now argues resulted in incriminating inferences, the issue is not preserved for appellate review as a matter of law (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Pellechia, 144 AD2d 704, 705; People v Mack, 143 AD2d 686).…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. GonzalezNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  2. People v. BallsNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  3. People v. PellechiaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
  4. People v. RobertsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  5. People v. MackAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People v. MatarreseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  2. People v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API