People v. JuddPeople v. Judd
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the People‘s contention, the defendant preserved for appellate review his contention that the trial court should have redacted his videotaped confession so as to omit references to possible prior robberies (see
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).
The defendant‘s remaining contention is without merit.
Skelos, J.P., Leventhal, Belen and Roman, JJ., concur.