From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ciprian

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 20, 2003
309 A.D.2d 874 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

1999-04480

Argued September 18, 2003.

October 20, 2003.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Demarest, J.), rendered May 10, 1999, convicting him of assault in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Melissa S. Horlick and Winston McIntosh of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Ruth E. Ross, and Jose Anibal Baez of counsel), for respondent.

Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, THOMAS A. ADAMS, WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Initially, the defendant's contention that the court improperly directed a juror who was suffering from a migraine headache to continue deliberating despite her discomfort and that the juror's subsequent assurance that she would "be okay" was insufficient to allow her to continue deliberating, is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05). In any event, the Supreme Court properly questioned her pursuant to CPL 270.35(2), and providently exercised its significant discretion in determining that the juror was able and willing to continue ( see People v. Jeanty, 94 N.Y.2d 507; People v. Page, 72 N.Y.2d 69).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

ALTMAN, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, ADAMS and MASTRO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Ciprian

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 20, 2003
309 A.D.2d 874 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Ciprian

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. HECTOR CIPRIAN, appellant

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

Date published: Oct 20, 2003

Citations

309 A.D.2d 874 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
766 N.Y.S.2d 43

Citing Cases

Ciprian v. Miller

During Petitioner's direct appeal before the Appellate Division, he asserted that the lack of a question mark…