dispositive. Trull, 349 N.C. at 447, 509 S.E.2d at 191. Although the exact details of the murder and robbery are lacking, the evidence, taken in the light most favorable to the State, permits a reasonable juror to infer that defendant murdered and robbed the victim without any break in the series of events. Defendant further argues that the trial court’s error violated his constitutional rights. Defendant did not raise this constitutional issue at trial; consequently, the trial court did not have the opportunity to consider or rule on this issue. N.C. R. App. P. 10(b)(1). Defendant has accordingly failed to preserve this assignment of error for appellate review. See State v. Fullwood, 343 N.C. 725, 733, 472 S.E.2d 883, 887 (1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1122, 137 L. Ed. 2d 339 (1997) (<HOLDING>). This assignment of error is overruled.
holding party must make timely and specific objection at trial to preserve issue for appellate review holding that defendant failed to raise a constitutional issue at trial and thus failed to preserve the issue for appellate review recognizing that the specific argument regarding an issue must be made in the trial court to preserve that issue for appellate review holding that a party had failed to preserve an argument for appellate review when that party had failed to argue the issue to the trial court either at trial or in his postjudgment motion holding defendant failed to preserve burden of proof issue for appeal