People v. Goncalves

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Goncalves

143 A.D.2d 530, 533 N.Y.S.2d 29, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10524

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedSeptember 27, 1988

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 143 A.D.2d 530 (People v. Goncalves) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Goncalves, 143 A.D.2d 530, 533 N.Y.S.2d 29, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10524 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: In the absence of a request by defendant, the trial court may not instruct the jury that no unfavorable inference may be drawn from defendant’s decision not to testify (CPL 300.10 [2]). Defendant did not request the charge and it was thus error for the court to so instruct the jury. Given the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt, however, "there is no reasonable possibility that the error might have contributed to defendant’s conviction” (People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 237; see also, People v Koberstein, 66 NY2d 989). We find, therefore, that the error is harmless. We have examined defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Onon[531]*531daga County Court, Mordue, J. — escape, first degree.) Present —Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Boomer, Balio and Davis, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: In the absence of a request by defendant, the trial court may not instruct the jury that no unfavorable inference may be drawn from defendant’s decision not to testify (CPL 300.10 [2]). Defendant did not request the charge and it was thus error for the court to so instruct the jury. Given the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt, however, "there is no reasonable possibility that the error might have contributed to defendant’s conviction” (People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 237; see also, People v Koberstein, 66 NY2d 989). We find, therefore, that the error is harmless. We have examined defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Onon[531]*531daga County Court, Mordue, J. — escape, first degree.) Present —Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Boomer, Balio and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 A.D.2d 530, 533 N.Y.S.2d 29, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10524, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-goncalves-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack