People v. HallPeople v. Hall
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant‘s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish that she used a “dangerous instrument” to injure the complainant is unpreserved for appellate review (see
The defendant‘s contentions regarding the jury instruction concerning “dangerous instruments,” and the denial of her request for a charge on the justifiable use of “ordinary physical force,” are without merit. The defendant‘s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, are without merit.
Skelos, J.P., Covello, Leventhal and Roman, JJ., concur.