Since defendant did not object to the trial court's use of an example or hypothetical in its supplemental charge for the purpose of clarifying the display element of the first degree robbery count, that issue has not been preserved for review as a matter of law (CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. If we were to review, we would find that the hypothetical was not unfair, and that the supplemental charge, viewed as a whole, conveyed the...
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.
