People v. McCargo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. McCargo

67 A.D.2d 955, 413 N.Y.S.2d 222, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10732

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

DecidedFebruary 13, 1979

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 67 A.D.2d 955 (People v. McCargo) 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. McCargo, 67 A.D.2d 955, 413 N.Y.S.2d 222, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10732 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered February 15, 1978, convicting him of burglary in the third degree and petit larceny, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. Prior to the selection of the second alternate juror the court stated that defense counsel had requested that it charge that no unfavorable inference could be drawn against the defendant if he failed to take the witness stand on his own behalf. Although no objection or exception was taken to the statement it was improper for the court to tell the jury that such a request had been made by the defendant. (See People vMcLucas, 15 NY2d 167; People v Muir, 51 AD2d 859; People v Strawder, 54 AD2d 743.) However, the court did not repeat the error when it charged the jury at the end of the case, so that the jury’s attention was not directed to that isolated remark (cf. People v Newman, 46 NY2d 126). Here the proof of guilt was so overwhelming that the error should be disregarded (see People v Strawder, supra). We have carefully considered the defendant’s other allegations of error and, so far as they were objected to, they lack merit. With regard to the unobjected errors the interest of justice does not require our intervention. O’Connor, J. P., Rabin, Gulotta and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered February 15, 1978, convicting him of burglary in the third degree and petit larceny, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. Prior to the selection of the second alternate juror the court stated that defense counsel had requested that it charge that no unfavorable inference could be drawn against the defendant if he failed to take the witness stand on his own behalf. Although no objection or exception was taken to the statement it was improper for the court to tell the jury that such a request had been made by the defendant. (See People vMcLucas, 15 NY2d 167; People v Muir, 51 AD2d 859; People v Strawder, 54 AD2d 743.) However, the court did not repeat the error when it charged the jury at the end of the case, so that the jury’s attention was not directed to that isolated remark (cf. People v Newman, 46 NY2d 126). Here the proof of guilt was so overwhelming that the error should be disregarded (see People v Strawder, supra). We have carefully considered the defendant’s other allegations of error and, so far as they were objected to, they lack merit. With regard to the unobjected errors the interest of justice does not require our intervention. O’Connor, J. P., Rabin, Gulotta and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

67 A.D.2d 955, 413 N.Y.S.2d 222, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10732, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mccargo-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack