[*1]
People v Jefferson (Kevin)
2004 NY Slip Op 51346(U)
Decided on November 5, 2004
Appellate Term, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.


Decided on November 5, 2004
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM: 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE TERM : 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS —————————————————————————————————————————————-x PRESENT : McCABE, P.J., RUDOLPH and ANGIOLILLO, JJ.
2003-444 S CR —————————————————————————————————————————————-x

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, —

against

KEVIN L. JEFFERSON, Appellant. —————————————————————————————————————————————-x


Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Justice Court, Town of Riverhead, Suffolk County (A. Smith, J.), rendered on February 27, 2003, convicting him of false personation (Penal Law § 190.23) and imposing sentence.


Judgment of conviction unanimously affirmed.

The trial court's denial of defendant's request for a transcript of the probable cause hearing was not improper as defendant's request was made after the commencement of the trial and was therefore untimely (see Matter of Eric W., 68 NY2d 633, 636 [1986]; People v Sanders, 31 NY2d 463, 467 [1973]).

Defendant's contention that the court's interested witness charge was improper is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Wells, 91 NY2d 987
[1998]). In any event, the court properly charged the jury that defendant was an interested witness since defendant testified at the trial (see People v Agosto, 73 NY2d 963 [1989]). Finally, the charge, which substantially conformed to CJI (NY) 7.03 and 7.04, was properly balanced (see People v Holly, 184 AD2d 581 [1992]).
Decision Date: November 05, 2004