finding general motion to dismiss at close of evidence insufficient to preserve claim regarding establishment of particular element of crimeSummary of this case from Singleton v. Duncan
Argued October 14, 1987
Decided November 24, 1987
Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, Luis M. Neco, J.
Marsha Taubenhaus and Philip L. Weinstein for appellant.
Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney (Gregory H. Mansfield and Norman Barclay of counsel), for respondent.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Defendant was convicted of robbery in the second degree (Penal Law § 160.10 [b]). The only issue defendant urges on this appeal — that the People failed to establish that the object he displayed to the victim appeared to be a lethal weapon — was not asserted at trial, and therefore has not been preserved for our review.
Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER, TITONE, HANCOCK, JR., and BELLACOSA concur.
Order affirmed in a memorandum.