Summary
holding that because "the defendant lied about the reason for his presence and failed to offer any legitimate explanation for it, the officer was justified in concluding that the defendant in fact had no privilege to be on the premises of the apartment complex" and thus had probable cause to arrest him for trespassing
Summary of this case from Greene v. BryanOpinion
October 22, 1990
Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Baker, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The defendant contends for the first time on appeal that the court erred in excluding certain hearsay testimony relevant to his "innocent mind" defense. However, since the defendant neither objected to the court's ruling nor made any offer of proof as to the nature, purpose or source of the hearsay, he failed to preserve the alleged error of law for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Black, 138 A.D.2d 498, 499; People v Billups, 132 A.D.2d 612, 613; People v. Zambrano, 114 A.D.2d 872). Under the circumstances, we decline to review it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.
Finally, we note that the defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Bracken, J.P., Sullivan, O'Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.