Opinion
January 4, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Sheindlin, J.).
Expert testimony concerning child sexual abuse syndrome was relevant and helpful to the jury's understanding of child abuse victims, a subject not within the ken of the average juror (People v. Keindl, 68 N.Y.2d 410, 422; People v. Cintron, 75 N.Y.2d 249, 267). The evidence was not offered to show that the assaults took place (People v. Taylor, 75 N.Y.2d 277, 293), but was relevant to explain why the victim had difficulty pinpointing dates, failed to initially disclose the abuse, and her reaction to the courtroom procedures. We further note that defendant's objection to this testimony, raised for the first time on appeal, is unpreserved as well as being substantively without merit.
We have examined defendant's remaining claims and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Carro, J.P., Wallach, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.