| People v Pilgrim |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 08041 [100 AD3d 932] |
| November 21, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Christopher Pilgrim, Appellant. |
—[*1] Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Diane R. Eisner ofcounsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Del Giudice,J.), rendered February 8, 2011, convicting him of criminal sexual act in the first degree, upon ajury verdict, and sentencing him to a determinate term of eight years of imprisonment plus aperiod of five years of postrelease supervision.
Ordered that the judgment is modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, byreducing the sentence imposed from a determinate term of eight years of imprisonment plus aperiod of five years of postrelease supervision to a determinate term of five years ofimprisonment plus a period of five years of postrelease supervision.
The defendant's contention that the Supreme Court's instructions to the prospective jurorsduring jury selection were improper is unpreserved for appellate review, since neither defensecounsel's general exception nor his arguments alerted the trial court to the specific objectionswhich the defendant now raises on appeal (see People v Hollingsworth, 299 AD2d 368[2002]; People v Staton, 124 AD2d 687 [1986]). In any event, the instructions duringvoir dire were not improper (see Peoplev Harper, 32 AD3d 16 [2006], affd 7 NY3d 882 [2006]; People v Hoyle, 32 AD3d 864[2006]; People v Andrews, 30AD3d 434 [2006]).
The sentence imposed was excessive to the extent indicated herein (see People vSuitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Florio, J.P., Leventhal, Austin and Cohen, JJ., concur.