Opinion
163
Decided September 23, 2003.
Appeal, by permission of a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, from an order of that Court, entered March 21, 2003, which (1) reversed, on the law, an order of the Supreme Court (John Brunetti, J.), entered in Onondaga County, granting defendant's CPL 330.30 motion to set aside the jury verdict and ordered a new trial, (2) denied the motion, (3) reinstated the verdict, and (4) remitted the matter for sentencing.
Muldoon Getz, Rochester (Gary Muldoon of counsel), for appellant.
William J. Fitzpatrick, District Attorney, Syracuse (James P. Maxwell of counsel), for respondent.
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo and Read concur.
MEMORANDUM:
The order of the Appellate Division reversing the order of the Supreme Court and denying defendant's CPL 330.30 motion, and reinstating the verdict convicting him of assault in the first degree (Penal Law § 120.10) and endangering the welfare of a child (Penal Law § 260.10), should be affirmed. A party's failure to specify the basis for its general objection renders its argument unpreserved for this Court's review (see People v. Tevaha, 84 N.Y.2d 879, 881). At trial, defense counsel made only a general objection to a portion of one of the expert's statements. Supreme Court sustained it and gave a limiting instruction. Defense counsel neither objected to the adequacy or accuracy of the limiting instruction nor specifically objected upon hearsay grounds to the expert's further testimony. Therefore, defendant's challenge to the expert's testimony was not preserved. The Appellate Division properly concluded that Supreme Court erred in granting defendant's Criminal Procedure Law § 330.30(1) motion on a ground that would not have required "a reversal or modification of the judgment as a matter of law by an appellate court."
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules, order affirmed, in a memorandum.