People v. GiampietroPeople v. Giampietro
—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the admission of expert testimony was not an improvident exercise of the trial court’s discretion. Such testimony was necessary to assist the jury in clarifying issues calling for professional or technical knowledge which is beyond the ken of the average juror (see, People v Hill,
The introduction into evidence of a videotape depicting the aftermath of the accident without the sound was not an improvident exercise of the trial court’s discretion (see, People v Moore,
The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or do not require reversal. Sullivan, J. P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.