Opinion
December 16, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Paul Bookson, J.).
The court properly permitted the arresting officer to testify about a witness's excited utterance ( see, People v. Caviness, 38 N.Y.2d 227), because the witness was clearly under the stress of nervous excitement from a startling event. Defendant's challenges to the reliability of the officer's account of the excited utterance are matters affecting its weight and not its admissibility.
Defendant's challenge to the court's charge is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice.
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.
We have considered defendant's remaining arguments, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief, and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Milonas, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.