We’re familiar with that court.
Greenfield takes them to task today, and rightly so. But he also beats up on another lawyer, whose “screw up” led to the bad result on appeal.
Except that it didn’t, and everyone knows it.
The quibble is that the defendant’s lawyer didn’t object to an improper question by the prosecutor at the trial. That left the issue “unpreserved” for appellate review, which was duly noted by the 4th department, which then declined to exercise its “discretion” to review the issue anyway.
But if the issue had been properly preserved, then the 4th department would have either: a) simply misrepresented the record or not mentioned it at all, two of their favorite practices; or b) “reviewed” the issue but found any error “harmless” because the proof of the defendant’s guilt was “overwhelming”, a misnomer of a standard that is actually satisfied by the thinnest of proof.