| People v Midura |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 07017 [54 AD3d 877] |
| September 16, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Jaroslaw Midura, Appellant. |
—[*1] Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Rhea A. Grob, andJoseph T. Gasper II of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mullen, J.),rendered November 28, 2006, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree andcriminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that he was deprived of his rights to confrontation and to a fair trialwhen the trial court denied his motion to admit into evidence a complete recording of a telephonecall to the 911 police emergency number (hereinafter the recording). This contention isunpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Dombroff, 44 AD3d 785,787 [2007]). Moreover, the defendant abandoned this argument because he never renewed hismotion to admit the excluded portions of the recording, even though the trial court stated, at thetime it denied his motion to admit the entire recording, that it would be willing to "revisit" theissue at a later time (see People v Graves, 85 NY2d 1024, 1027 [1995]; People v Leon-Ramos, 28 AD3d679, 679-680 [2006]). In any event, even assuming that the recording could be attributed tothe complainant, contrary to the defendant's contention, it was not inconsistent with thecomplainant's trial testimony (see People v Jones, 136 AD2d 740, 741 [1988]). Santucci,J.P., Angiolillo, Eng and Chambers, JJ., concur.