PEOPLE v. TRAMMELL

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Shelley TRAMMELL, Defendant-Appellant.

Decided: April 28, 2006

PRESENT:  PIGOTT, JR., P.J., SCUDDER, KEHOE, GREEN, AND HAYES, JJ. The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Karen C. Russo-McLaughlin of Counsel), for Defendant-Appellant. Frank J. Clark, District Attorney, Buffalo (Steven Meyer of Counsel), for Plaintiff-Respondent.

Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, of attempted rape in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.35[1] ), sexual abuse in the first degree (§ 130.65[1] ), and unlawful imprisonment in the second degree (§ 135.05).   Contrary to defendant's contentions, the conviction of attempted rape in the first degree is supported by legally sufficient evidence, and the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672).   By failing to object to County Court's ultimate Sandoval ruling, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the ruling constitutes an abuse of discretion (see People v. Caito, 23 A.D.3d 1135, 1136, 807 N.Y.S.2d 755;  People v. Rodriguez, 21 A.D.3d 1400, 804 N.Y.S.2d 160;  People v. Brown, 16 A.D.3d 1102, 790 N.Y.S.2d 912, lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 760, 801 N.Y.S.2d 254, 834 N.E.2d 1264).   In any event, that contention lacks merit (see generally People v. Hayes, 97 N.Y.2d 203, 208, 738 N.Y.S.2d 663, 764 N.E.2d 963;  People v. Walker, 83 N.Y.2d 455, 458-459, 611 N.Y.S.2d 118, 633 N.E.2d 472;  People v. Pavao, 59 N.Y.2d 282, 292, 464 N.Y.S.2d 458, 451 N.E.2d 216).   Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

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

MEMORANDUM: