From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Padro

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 8, 1990
75 N.Y.2d 820 (N.Y. 1990)

Opinion

Argued January 4, 1990

Decided February 8, 1990

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, Budd G. Goodman, J.

Myron Beldock and Lee F. Bantle for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney (Patrick J. Hynes and Donald J. Siewert of counsel), for respondent.


Order affirmed. A postverdict motion made pursuant to CPL 330.30 is not, by itself, ordinarily sufficient to preserve a "question of law" within the meaning of CPL 470.05 (2) and inasmuch as defendant failed to make appropriate objections during trial, the points presented by defendant are not preserved for review in this court.

Concur: Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges SIMONS, KAYE, TITONE, HANCOCK, JR., and BELLACOSA. Taking no part: Judge ALEXANDER.


Summaries of

People v. Padro

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 8, 1990
75 N.Y.2d 820 (N.Y. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Padro

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MOSES PADRO, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Feb 8, 1990

Citations

75 N.Y.2d 820 (N.Y. 1990)
552 N.Y.S.2d 555
551 N.E.2d 1233

Citing Cases

People v. Williams

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn ( Phyllis Mintz and Leonard Joblove of counsel), for…

People v. Marcano

Inasmuch as he did not object on Molineux grounds, defendant failed to preserve for our review his further…