People v. Chichester

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Weber, J.), rendered June 28, 1994, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contentions regarding the legal sufficiency of the evidence are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 ), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Artis, 220 AD2d 441 , 442). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The admission as an excited utterance of the audiotape of the emergency telephone call reporting the discovery of the corpse was proper (see, People v Buie, 86 NY2d 501 ; People v Masas, 244 AD2d 433 ; People v Palmer, 237 AD2d 311 ; People v Vasquez, 88 NY2d 561 , 579). Here, the evidence showed that the emergency call was made as soon as the caller was able to reach a working telephone.

The court providently exercised its discretion in restricting the defense counsel from cross-examining the prosecution’s witnesses regarding a State Investigation Commission report on the ground that the report concerned collateral issues (see, People v Scarola, 71 NY2d 769 , 777; People v McGriff, 201 AD2d 672 ). The cross-examination thwarted by the trial court was to consist of nothing more than disparaging questions bearing on police credibility but irrelevant to the issues of the defendant’s guilt (see, People v Ashner, 190 AD2d 238 ).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.

Copertino, J. P., Altman, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.