People v. Napoli
This text of 212 A.D.2d 1022 (People v. Napoli) 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.
Opinion
—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject the contention of defendant that his absence from an in-chambers conference held prior to jury selection deprived him of the right to be present at a Ventimiglia hearing (see, People v Spotford, 196 AD2d 179, Iv granted 83 NY2d 915). The record fully supports Supreme Court’s determination, made after a reconstruction hearing, that the limited discussion at the in-chambers conference did not constitute a Ventimiglia hearing. Neither defendant nor the People made an application for a Ventimiglia ruling; no factual or legal arguments were made; and the court did not make an affirmative ruling (see, People v Odiat, 82 NY2d 872; People v Dokes, 79 NY2d 656; cf, People v Sanchez, 209 AD2d 1012; People v Spotford, supra).
Defendant failed to preserve for review the court’s failure to charge the jury that defendant’s knowledge of the weight of the controlled substance must be proven (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Young, 209 AD2d 996; People v Mammarello, 209 AD2d 999), and we decline to reach it as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see, CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Mark, J.—Crim[1023]*1023inal Sale Controlled Substance, 1st Degree.) Present—Lawton, J. P., Fallon, Wesley, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
212 A.D.2d 1022, 624 N.Y.S.2d 1002, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1899, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-napoli-nyappdiv-1995.