Opinion
January 25, 1988
Appeal from the County Court, Orange County (Colabella, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the court should have given a charge to the jury on the issue of whether he was represented by counsel on an unrelated crime (see, People v Bartolomeo, 53 N.Y.2d 225; People v Rogers, 48 N.Y.2d 167) has not been preserved for our review as he did not request such a charge at trial (see, People v Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467). Further, assuming without deciding that such a charge is necessary in a proper case, here it was clearly unwarranted as the undisputed evidence at trial established that the defendant was in fact not represented by an attorney at the time of police questioning (see, People v Rosa, 65 N.Y.2d 380, on remand 116 A.D.2d 489, lv denied 67 N.Y.2d 950; People v Kazmarick, 52 N.Y.2d 322).
The court gave a thorough and proper charge on the issue of the voluntariness of any alleged statements made by the defendant. Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Rubin and Spatt, JJ., concur.