People v. Wiley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Wiley

275 A.D.2d 1020, 714 N.Y.S.2d 914, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9651

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

DecidedSeptember 29, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 275 A.D.2d 1020 (People v. Wiley) 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. Wiley, 275 A.D.2d 1020, 714 N.Y.S.2d 914, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9651 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: After Supreme Court concluded its charge but before the jury began deliberating, the prosecutor requested a further charge on the permissible inference that may be drawn from the recent, exclusive and unexplained possession of the fruits of a burglary (see, 1 CJI[NY] 9.80, at 562). We reject defendant’s contentions that the court erred in giving that charge absent a request by the jury for additional instructions (see, CPL 300.10 [5]) and that the further charge was improper (see, People v Durgey, 186 AD2d 899, 902, lv denied 81 NY2d 788). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Wisner, J. — Burglary, 3rd Degree.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Hayes, Hurlbutt and Kehoe, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: After Supreme Court concluded its charge but before the jury began deliberating, the prosecutor requested a further charge on the permissible inference that may be drawn from the recent, exclusive and unexplained possession of the fruits of a burglary (see, 1 CJI[NY] 9.80, at 562). We reject defendant’s contentions that the court erred in giving that charge absent a request by the jury for additional instructions (see, CPL 300.10 [5]) and that the further charge was improper (see, People v Durgey, 186 AD2d 899, 902, lv denied 81 NY2d 788). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Wisner, J. — Burglary, 3rd Degree.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Hayes, Hurlbutt and Kehoe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.D.2d 1020, 714 N.Y.S.2d 914, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9651, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-wiley-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack