| People v Hyatt |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 03311 [50 AD3d 436] |
| April 15, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v ShaneHyatt, Appellant. |
—[*1] Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Lucy Jane Lang of counsel), forrespondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Lewis Bart Stone, J.), rendered March 28,2006, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted assault in the second degree, andsentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.
The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is nobasis for disturbing the jury's determinations concerning credibility.
The court properly permitted brief and limited testimony from a Department of Correctioninvestigator concerning the events leading up to defendant's arrest (see e.g. People v Guerrero, 22 AD3d 266[2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 882 [2005]). The testimony was based on the investigator'spersonal knowledge, and it did not contain any hearsay, express or implied. Defendant'sargument that this testimony invaded the fact-finding function of the jury, particularly byreferring to the incident as an "assault," is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interestof justice. As an alternative holding, we find it without merit.
By failing to object, by failing to make specific objections, or by failing to request furtherrelief after curative actions were taken by the court, defendant failed to preserve his presentchallenges to testimony that allegedly suggested he had committed uncharged crimes or bad actswhile incarcerated, and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. As an alternativeholding, we also reject them on the merits. The court's curative actions were sufficient to preventany undue prejudice.
The record does not establish that defendant's sentence was based on any improper [*2]criteria, and we perceive no basis for reducing the sentence ordirecting that it be served concurrently with an unrelated sentence. Concur—Lippman,P.J., Tom, Williams and Acosta, JJ.