People v. Case, 29 A.D.3d 706

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant‘s contentions regarding the convictions of rape in the second degree and incest during specified two-month periods are not preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Weldon, 191 AD2d 662 [1993]; People v Barrett, 166 AD2d 657, 658 [1990]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245 [1989]). In any event, the contentions are without merit. The defendant repeatedly raped and sexually abused his biological daughter over a period of five years. The victim could not recall the exact dates of the incidents. The indictment charged the defendant with a specific crime during a specified two-month period. In view of the age of the victim, the repetitive and clandestine nature of the crimes, the continuous and long-term nature of the abuse, and the fact that time is not a material element of the charged crimes, the two-month intervals were reasonably specific and provided the defendant with adequate notice (see People v Watt, 81 NY2d 772, 774 [1993]; People v Keindl, 68 NY2d 410, 419 [1986]; People v Morris, 61 NY2d 290, 293-296 [1984]; People v Cosby, 222 AD2d 690 [1995]; People v Barrett, supra at 658; People v Willette, 109 AD2d 112, 114-115 [1985]; People v Coveney, 134 Misc 2d 894 [1987]). Moreover, the counts are neither duplicitous nor multiplicitous (see People v Keindl, supra at 419; People v Cosby, supra).

The defendant received the effective assistance of counsel (see People v Henry, 95 NY2d 563 [2000]; People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712 [1998]). Florio, J.P., Miller, Adams and Skelos, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: People v. Case

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

Date Published: May 9, 2006

Citations: 29 A.D.3d 706; 814 N.Y.S.2d 272

Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.