Opinion
April 8, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Jerome Hornblass, J.).
The declaration of a mistrial after the first trial was an appropriate exercise of discretion (see, People v. Dawkins, 82 N.Y.2d 226, 232), since the trial was not long or complex, the jury's deliberations had been lengthy, the second deadlock note from the jury was detailed and unwavering, and there would have been a substantial potential for coercion if the court had required this jury to engage in further deliberations (see, Matter of Plummer v. Rothwax, 63 N.Y.2d 243, 251).
Defendant's objection to an isolated reference in the People's summation to defendant's post-arrest detention is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the remark was a proper response to an issue raised by the defense, and did not serve to depict defendant as a criminal.
Concur — Ellerin, P. J., Sullivan, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.