Narrative Opinion Summary
Judgment unanimously affirmed. The evidence, viewed favorably for the prosecution, sufficiently supports the conviction. The defendant did not object to the prosecutor's opening statement or summation, resulting in the failure to preserve these arguments for appellate review. The court declines to address these issues as a discretionary matter in the interest of justice. The defendant's sentence is deemed neither harsh nor excessive, and the court will not alter it. This appeal originates from the Ontario County Court, presided over by Judge Henry, Jr., concerning a conviction for third-degree rape. Judges Green (P.J.), Balio, Wesley, Callahan, and Doerr participated in the decision.
Legal Issues Addressed
Assessment of Sentence Severitysubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court concluded that the defendant's sentence was appropriate and did not warrant modification on the grounds of being harsh or excessive.
Reasoning: The defendant's sentence is deemed neither harsh nor excessive, and the court will not alter it.
Discretionary Review in the Interest of Justicesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court chose not to exercise its discretion to review the unpreserved issues in the interest of justice.
Reasoning: The court declines to address these issues as a discretionary matter in the interest of justice.
Preservation of Objections for Appellate Reviewsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The defendant's failure to object to the prosecutor's opening statement or summation at trial resulted in the forfeiture of these issues for appellate review.
Reasoning: The defendant did not object to the prosecutor's opening statement or summation, resulting in the failure to preserve these arguments for appellate review.
Sufficiency of Evidence for Convictionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court found that the evidence presented at trial, when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, was adequate to support the defendant's conviction for third-degree rape.
Reasoning: The evidence, viewed favorably for the prosecution, sufficiently supports the conviction.