People v. John

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. John

221 A.D.2d 564, 633 N.Y.S.2d 599, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11939

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

DecidedNovember 20, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 221 A.D.2d 564 (People v. John) 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. John, 221 A.D.2d 564, 633 N.Y.S.2d 599, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11939 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County

[565]*565(Greenberg, J.), rendered February 24, 1994, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on evaluating flight as evidence of consciousness of guilt is unpreserved for appellate review. The defendant never requested such a charge or objected to the court’s failure to so charge (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v McKenzie, 67 NY2d 695, 697; People v Leitzsey, 173 AD2d 488; People v Shepherd, 176 AD2d 369, 370; People v Rosa, 176 AD2d 187, 188). In any event, the defendant’s claim is without merit.

The evidence of flight was not unduly emphasized in the prosecutor’s summation and the evidence of the defendant’s guilt of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree was overwhelming. Therefore, any error was clearly harmless (see, People v Rodriguez, 135 AD2d 586, 587; People v Jones, 104 AD2d 826, 827). Sullivan, J. P., Thompson, Hart and Gold-stein, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County

[565]*565(Greenberg, J.), rendered February 24, 1994, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on evaluating flight as evidence of consciousness of guilt is unpreserved for appellate review. The defendant never requested such a charge or objected to the court’s failure to so charge (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v McKenzie, 67 NY2d 695, 697; People v Leitzsey, 173 AD2d 488; People v Shepherd, 176 AD2d 369, 370; People v Rosa, 176 AD2d 187, 188). In any event, the defendant’s claim is without merit.

The evidence of flight was not unduly emphasized in the prosecutor’s summation and the evidence of the defendant’s guilt of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree was overwhelming. Therefore, any error was clearly harmless (see, People v Rodriguez, 135 AD2d 586, 587; People v Jones, 104 AD2d 826, 827). Sullivan, J. P., Thompson, Hart and Gold-stein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

221 A.D.2d 564, 633 N.Y.S.2d 599, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11939, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-john-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack