People v. Urbinelli
This text of 197 A.D.2d 417 (People v. Urbinelli) 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, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Robert Seewald, J.), rendered [418]*418May 1, 1991, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 3 Vs to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.
The People met their burden of establishing the voluntariness of defendant’s statement beyond a reasonable doubt (People v Rosa, 65 NY2d 380, 386). The suppression court properly found defendant’s assertions of physical abuse patently incredible (People v Prochilo, 41 NY2d 759, 761) and we discern no basis to disturb that determination.
The court properly denied defense counsel’s request for a missing witness charge. Counsel’s request was untimely and lacked sufficient specificity (People v Gonzalez, 68 NY2d 424, 427-428).
The court’s comprehensive instruction with respect to proper notetaking by the jury cured any possible prejudice that might have occurred as a result of the previous passing of notes among jurors during readback. Any prospective problem was cured by the court’s directive prohibiting further notetaking (People v Tucker, 77 NY2d 861; People v DiLuca, 85 AD2d 439, 445-446).
We have considered defendant’s remaining claims and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Nardelli, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
197 A.D.2d 417, 602 N.Y.S.2d 393, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9624, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-urbinelli-nyappdiv-1993.