PEOPLE v. JOHNSON

Judgment affirmed.

The court's instructions on reasonable doubt do not warrant reversal. In its instructions as to reasonable doubt, the trial court referred to establishing guilt to a "moral certainty", as well as to wavering minds and even scales. Such language was improper (see, People v. Cousart, 74 A.D.2d 877; People v McCray, 57 A.D.2d 632). However, an examination of the entire charge indicates that the concept of reasonable doubt was accurately explained to the jury (see, People v. Ortiz, 92 A.D.2d 595, 596; see also, People v. Turrell, 66 A.D.2d 862, affd 50 N.Y.2d 400, cert denied sub nom. Pena v. New York, 449 U.S. 1087; People v. Giammarino, 105 A.D.2d 802; People v. Townes, 104 A.D.2d 1057). Mangano, J.P., Gibbons, Niehoff and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.