Defendant's various challenges to the introduction of prior consistent statements by the complainant are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find no prejudice to defendant, since he relied heavily on most of the statements in question to attack the reliability of the complainant's testimony (see, People v Richards,
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.