Judgment affirmed.
The material points advanced by appellant and urged by his counsel do not constitute grounds for reversal as a matter of law because there were no timely protests of error, taken by objections or exceptions, as to the proof admitted, or as to the trial court's failure to charge on the effect of a delayed arraignment (CPL 470.05, subd. 2). The case, therefore, comes down to the question whether this court should reverse in the interests of...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
