| People v Christie |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 07582 [55 AD3d 341] |
| October 7, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Dwayne Christie, Appellant. |
—[*1] Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Mary Jo L. Blanchard of counsel), forrespondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Joseph J. Dawson, J.), rendered March 22, 2007,convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted assault in the first degree and criminalpossession of a weapon in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of fiveyears, unanimously affirmed. The matter is remitted to Supreme Court, Bronx County, for furtherproceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of theevidence (see People v Danielson, 9NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury's determinationsconcerning credibility. Defendant's accessorial liability could be readily inferred from thecomplete chain of events (see e.g. People v Marte, 7 AD3d 405 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 677[2004]). When viewed in the context of the surrounding circumstances, including motive, theonly reasonable explanation for defendant's use of the words "Bust it" was that he was directinghis companion to shoot the victim (seePeople v Martinez, 8 AD3d 8 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 677 [2004]).
Defendant argues that he was deprived of a fair trial by alleged prosecutorial misconductoccurring at numerous points in the proceedings. However, the only issues that he has arguablypreserved are those that were the subject of his mistrial motions. In each instance, the courtprovided a suitable remedy that prevented the alleged misconduct from causing any prejudice,and it properly exercised its discretion in denying a mistrial (see People v Santiago, 52NY2d 865 [1981]). By failing to object, by making generalized objections, by failing to requestfurther relief after objections were sustained, or by raising issues for the first time in a CPL330.30 motion to set aside the verdict, defendant failed to preserve any of his other prosecutorialmisconduct claims, and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. As an alternativeholding, we likewise conclude that the court's curative actions sufficed to prevent any prejudice.
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur—Tom, J.P., Friedman,Buckley, Acosta and Freedman, JJ. [See 14 Misc 3d 1219(A), 2007 NY Slip Op50091(U).]