History
  • No items yet
midpage
People v. Fleming
70 N.Y.2d 947
NY
1988
Check Treatment

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant’s sole claim of error — that the trial court violated his right of confrontation by permitting the arresting officer to testify that he arrested defendant after a conversation with an individual who did not testify — has not been preserved for our review. Although defense counsel sought a prospective ruling on this point, the court declined to make an anticipatory ruling. When the arresting officer later testified at trial, counsel entered objections as "objection” or "leading”, but failed to advise the trial court that the present claimed error was the basis for any of his objections. The word "objection” alone was insufficient to preserve the issue for our review (see, People v Love, 57 NY2d 1023, 1025; People v West, 56 NY2d 662, 663).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Case Details

Case Name: People v. Fleming
Court Name: New York Court of Appeals
Date Published: Jan 19, 1988
Citation: 70 N.Y.2d 947
Court Abbreviation: NY
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Log In