Opinion
August 17, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edwin Torres, J.).
Defendant's shared intent to commit the robbery that was the predicate for the felony murder conviction was proven by legally sufficient evidence, including his own statements, that he circled the huddled victims, adding to the appearance of overwhelming odds and cutting off any avenue of retreat, as his accomplices darted in stabbing and stealing ( Matter of Eric R., 213 A.D.2d 310, 311; People v. Sims, 209 A.D.2d 192, lv denied 84 N.Y.2d 1015; People v. Corbett, 162 A.D.2d 415, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 837). There is no basis to conclude that defendant's statement was not voluntarily given. Defendant's challenges to the impeachment of his character witnesses are either unpreserved (CPL 470.05) or without merit ( People v. Clemente, 202 A.D.2d 302, lv denied 84 N.Y.2d 906). Defendant's claim that he was excluded from sidebar conferences during voir dire is not supported by an adequate record ( People v. Melendez, 205 A.D.2d 392, 393, lv denied 84 N.Y.2d 829), and is in any event without merit since the trial took place before the decision in People v Antommarchi ( 80 N.Y.2d 247). Defendant's claim that the medical examiner's audiotape is Rosario material that should have been delivered to him is without merit ( People v. Washington, 86 N.Y.2d 189; see also, People v. Nova, 206 A.D.2d 132). We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find that none of them warrant modification of the judgment.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Ross and Mazzarelli, JJ.