People v. Qualls
The People of the State of New York v. Augustus Qualls
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
The defendant’s objection at trial was solely on the ground that the evidence constituted improper bolstering. That was insufficient to preserve for our review the contentions now advanced that the evidence constituted inadmissible hearsay and that its introduction violated the defendant’s constitutional right of confrontation (see People v Gonzalez, 55 NY2d 720 , decided herewith). The other issues were either not preserved or are found to be without merit.
*735 Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.
Order affirmed in a memorandum.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(defendant failed to preserve argument that evidence was inadmissible hearsay and introduction violated constitutional right of confrontation because defendant objected at trial only on ground that evidence constituted improper bolstering)
Cited by 40 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.