People v. Lenahan

• Decision Date: 30 September 1991
• Citation: 176 A.D.2d 353,574 N.Y.S.2d 1000
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Thomas LENAHAN, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 1000

574 N.Y.S.2d 1000

176 A.D.2d 353

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Thomas LENAHAN, Appellant.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division,

Second Department.

September 30, 1991

Philip L. Weinstein, New York City (John Gemmill, of counsel), for appellant. Charles J. Hynes, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Jay M. Cohen, Leonard Joblove and Susan L. Merrill, of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Broomer, J.), rendered August 1, 1989, convicting him of assault in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support the conviction of assault in the second degree because there was no showing of his intent to cause physical injury is unpreserved for appellate review since the defendant failed to advance this argument before the trial court in a motion to dismiss the indictment at the close of the People's case, or at any other time (see, People v. Davis, 172 A.D.2d 553, 568 N.Y.S.2d 410 [2d Dept., 1991]; People v. Taylor, 170 A.D.2d 706, 567 N.Y.S.2d 118 [2d Dept., 1991]; People v. Hood, 156 A.D.2d 468, 548 N.Y.S.2d 914; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245, 250, 541 N.Y.S.2d 9). Under the circumstances of this case, we decline to review this contention in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. We have reviewed the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.

MANGANO, P.J., and KUNZEMAN, MILLER and COPERTINO, JJ., concur.