People v. Clarke

• Decision Date: 19 January 1993
• Citation: People v. Clarke, 593 N.Y.S.2d 784, 81 N.Y.2d 777, 609 N.E.2d 137 (N.Y. 1993)
• Parties: , 609 N.E.2d 137 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Archie CLARKE, Appellant.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Page 784

593 N.Y.S.2d 784

81 N.Y.2d 777, 609 N.E.2d 137

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v.Archie CLARKE, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Jan. 19, 1993.

George W. Albro and Philip L. Weinstein, New York City, for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, Dist. Atty. of New York County, New York City(Myles L. Orosco, of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURTMEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, 185 A.D.2d 124, 585 N.Y.S.2d 738.

A party generally must specify the basis for an objection to preserve a question of law for this Court's review.In this case defense counsel made only a general objection to the court's multiple rulings regarding the proposed testimony of a witness.Accordingly, defendant's present contention that the testimony constituted hearsay and improperly bolstered another prosecution witness' testimony has not been preserved for our review.

SIMONS, Acting C.J., and KAYE, TITONE, HANCOCK and BELLACOSA, JJ., concur.

SMITH, J., taking no part.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals(22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.