Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

PEOPLE v. GONZALEZ

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Feb 9, 2010
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the trial court's Allen charge ( see Allen v United States, 164 US 492) was improper is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v Franklin, 54 AD3d 964). In any event, contrary to the defendant's contention, the charge, on the whole, was balanced and neutral ( see People v McKenzie, 48 AD3d 594, 595; People v Kendrick, 256 AD2d 420, 421). The court's instructions were directed at the jurors in general, and "did not urge that a dissenting juror abandon his or her own conviction, attempt to coerce or compel the jury to reach a particular verdict, or shame the jury into reaching a verdict" ( People v McKenzie, 48 AD3d at 595; see People v Gonzales, 281 AD2d 432; People v Perdomo, 204 AD2d 358).

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.