Majority
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Although we agree that the trial court erred in its charge on the issue of intent (see People v O’Neill, 59 AD2d 540 , 542) and that subsequent to its initial proper charge on the defense of justification (Penal Law, § 35.15, subd 2, par [a]) the court’s further statements on that issue were misleading, neither of those points was preserved for review (People v Fonseca, 36 NY2d 133 ; CPL 470.05). Additionally, while the court’s determination to charge a lesser degree of assault was not made until after defendant’s summation (see People v Graham, 57 AD2d 478 , 481, affd 44 NY2d 768 ), the error thus committed was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt (People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230 ). The theory of the defense was justification and it may not be
Cases cited
- People v. O'Neill 59 AD2d 540 at 542 p. 1021
- People v. Fonseca 36 NY2d 133 p. 1021
- People v. Graham 57 AD2d 478 at 481 p. 1021
- People v. Crimmins 36 NY2d 230 p. 1021
- People v. Vicaretti 54 AD2d 236 at 250 p. 1022
- People v. Jones 27 NY2d 501 p. 1022