PEOPLE v. BAILEY (2003)

 Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05[4] ) and assault in the third degree (§ 120.00[1] ).   We reject defendant's contention that County Court erred in permitting the People to question the victim on redirect examination concerning prior incidents of domestic abuse.   Defendant opened the door to such questioning by cross-examining the victim with respect to her prior altercations with defendant (see People v. Rojas, 97 N.Y.2d 32, 37-38, 735 N.Y.S.2d 470, 760 N.E.2d 1265).   Contrary to defendant's further contention, the court properly admitted photographs depicting the victim's injuries.   The first two counts of the indictment included allegations that defendant had caused serious physical injury, and it therefore was proper to admit photographs to establish the extent of the victim's injuries (see generally People v. Pobliner, 32 N.Y.2d 356, 369-370, 345 N.Y.S.2d 482, 298 N.E.2d 637, rearg. denied 33 N.Y.2d 657, 348 N.Y.S.2d 1030, 303 N.E.2d 710, cert. denied 416 U.S. 905, 94 S.Ct. 1609, 40 L.Ed.2d 110).

 Defendant did not object after the court issued a curative instruction with respect to its justification charge and thus failed to preserve for our review his present contention concerning that charge (see CPL 470. 05[2] ).   The verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672), and the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

MEMORANDUM: