Citation Numbers: 115 A.D.2d 266, 495 N.Y.S.2d 829, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54526
Filed Date: 11/15/1985
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/28/2024
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted of endangering the welfare of a child (Penal Law § 260.10 [1]). The verdict is amply supported by the evidence (see, People v Ahlers, 98 AD2d 821). The claim of repugnancy in the verdicts of guilty of endangering the welfare of a child and not guilty of first degree sexual abuse was not preserved for review (see, People v Satloff, 56 NY2d 745, 746; People v Stahl, 53 NY2d 1048, 1050), and is without merit in any event. The elements of each crime are different and the jury could have found that although defendant did not possess the requisite intent for sexual abuse, he did nevertheless act in a manner likely to be injurious to the child’s physical, mental or moral welfare (see, People v Tucker, 55 NY2d 1, 6; People v Collins, 92 AD2d 740).