Majority
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The Rosario violations claimed by the defendant are unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Kane, 85 NY2d 1024 , 1027; People v Rogelio, 79 NY2d 843 , 844; People v Wright, 204 AD2d 372 , 373; People v Ciro, 195 AD2d 568 , 569). The defendant’s contention that he is entitled to a new trial because of prosecutorial misconduct is similarly unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Comer, 73 NY2d 955 ; People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951 ). We decline to reach these issues in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. O’Brien, J. P., Florio, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Graves 85 NY2d 1024 at 1027 p. 433
- People v. Rogelio 79 NY2d 843 at 844 p. 433
- People v. Medina 53 NY2d 951 p. 433