From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Amante

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 4, 1997
242 A.D.2d 275 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

August 4, 1997

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Aiello, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

There is no merit to the defendant's claim that the court violated CPL 310.20 (2) when it submitted a verdict sheet that contained seven notes instructing the jury on the order in which the charges should be considered. The notes involved herein were simply "direction[s] regarding the order in which the submitted charges should be considered" ( People v. Cole, 85 N.Y.2d 990, 991-992). Such directions are proper ( see, People v Simpson, 222 A.D.2d 462; People v. Albornoz-Sinisterra, 220 A.D.2d 600; People v. Daughtry, 202 A.D.2d 686).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.

Thompson, J.P., Pizzuto, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Amante

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 4, 1997
242 A.D.2d 275 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. Amante

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOHN AMANTE, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Aug 4, 1997

Citations

242 A.D.2d 275 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
660 N.Y.S.2d 589

Citing Cases

People v. Edmonson

The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment provides that no person shall "be subject for the same…

People v. Amante

March 5, 2002. Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of…