People v. Noel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Noel

34 A.D.3d 699, 823 N.Y.S.2d 692

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

DecidedNovember 21, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 34 A.D.3d 699 (People v. Noel) 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. Noel, 34 A.D.3d 699, 823 N.Y.S.2d 692 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Brennan, J.), rendered April 28, 2004, convicting him of assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

[700]*700Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that he was deprived of his constitutional right to a jury trial when the trial court failed to make inquiry of a juror to ascertain whether that juror was asleep during a portion of the court’s charge, and we decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to address the contention (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]; People v Armstrong, 26 AD3d 339 [2006]). Florio, J.P., Miller, Goldstein and Lunn, 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 (Brennan, J.), rendered April 28, 2004, convicting him of assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

[700]*700Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that he was deprived of his constitutional right to a jury trial when the trial court failed to make inquiry of a juror to ascertain whether that juror was asleep during a portion of the court’s charge, and we decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to address the contention (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]; People v Armstrong, 26 AD3d 339 [2006]). Florio, J.P., Miller, Goldstein and Lunn, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

34 A.D.3d 699, 823 N.Y.S.2d 692, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-noel-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack