midpage

People v. CruzPeople v. Cruz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Mar 7, 1996
Versions:225 A.D.2d 325
638 N.Y.S.2d 639
638 N.Y.2d 639
1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2082

When the court observed that a juror may have "doze[d] off a couple a times”, defense counsel stated that he "didn’t see it”, and requested no remedy. Therefore, his present claim that the court should have conducted an inquiry is unpreserved for appellate review, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. In any event, on this record, there is an insufficient basis to conclude that the court should have conducted an inquiry (People v Ferguson, 165 AD2d 789, lv denied 77 NY2d 838).

We perceive no abuse of discretion in sentencing. Concur— Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Wallach, Ross and Williams, JJ.

Case Details

Case Name: People v. Cruz
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Mar 7, 1996
Citations: 225 A.D.2d 325; 638 N.Y.S.2d 639; 638 N.Y.2d 639; 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2082
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
Log In