People v. Gonzalez

225 A.D.2d 468, 639 N.Y.2d 386, 639 N.Y.S.2d 386, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3182
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 26, 1996·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

[469]*469Defendant’s guilt was proven by legally sufficient evidence and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490).

The court’s pre-voir dire instructions to the jury do not require reversal. Although the court was ill-advised in going into unnecessary detail as to the evidence that the prosecutor intended to offer at trial and the possibility of a "contrary” view, the court’s, additional explicit instructions to the jurors, that the evidence will come "from the witness stand * * * not me” and that a defendant in a criminal case has no burden to prove anything, were sufficient to dispel any prejudice to defendant. The court did not give the jurors a list of the elements of the charges (cf., People v Townsend, 67 NY2d 815), and the court’s preliminary instructions were otherwise balanced (cf., People v Compton, 119 AD2d 473).

We perceive no abuse of discretion in sentencing. Concur— Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.

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

People v. Gonzalez, 225 A.D.2d 468, 639 N.Y.2d 386, 639 N.Y.S.2d 386, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3182 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

225 A.D.2d 468 (People v. Gonzalez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Murray
305 A.D.2d 301 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
People v. Warwick
239 A.D.2d 124 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)