People v. Alvarez

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Alvarez

655 N.E.2d 171, 86 N.Y.2d 761, 631 N.Y.S.2d 130, 1995 N.Y. LEXIS 2235

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 6, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by31 cases

This text of 655 N.E.2d 171 (People v. Alvarez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Alvarez, 655 N.E.2d 171, 86 N.Y.2d 761, 631 N.Y.S.2d 130, 1995 N.Y. LEXIS 2235 (N.Y. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. After a jury trial, defendant was convicted of criminal possession and sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. On appeal, defendant challenged the court’s Allen charge to the jury as being improper. The Appellate Division rejected defendant’s contention.

*763 The record indicates that the Allen charge when taken as a whole was proper. The initial charge stressed the importance of reaching a verdict without forcing any juror to yield a conscientious belief (see, People v Ali, 65 AD2d 513, 514, affd 47 NY2d 920). While noting the jurors must accommodate inconsistencies in what other jurors may urge and attempt to reconcile the testimony, the court urged the jurors to "stick to [their] guns” if they believed in the "righteousness” of their positions. Moreover, any lack of clarity that could have arisen from the initial charge was dispelled by the court’s supplemental instruction.

Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. After a jury trial, defendant was convicted of criminal possession and sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. On appeal, defendant challenged the court’s Allen charge to the jury as being improper. The Appellate Division rejected defendant’s contention.

*763 The record indicates that the Allen charge when taken as a whole was proper. The initial charge stressed the importance of reaching a verdict without forcing any juror to yield a conscientious belief (see, People v Ali, 65 AD2d 513, 514, affd 47 NY2d 920). While noting the jurors must accommodate inconsistencies in what other jurors may urge and attempt to reconcile the testimony, the court urged the jurors to "stick to [their] guns” if they believed in the "righteousness” of their positions. Moreover, any lack of clarity that could have arisen from the initial charge was dispelled by the court’s supplemental instruction.

Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

655 N.E.2d 171, 86 N.Y.2d 761, 631 N.Y.S.2d 130, 1995 N.Y. LEXIS 2235, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-alvarez-ny-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack