From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Deago

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 1, 1992
188 A.D.2d 276 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

December 1, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (William Wallace, III, J.).


There was no reasonable view of the evidence to support a jury charge on attempted rape, since there was no basis for the jury to discredit the complainant's testimony that there was penetration, while crediting the remainder of her testimony. The brief questioning of the juror in the presence of defendant's counsel but not defendant, was proper (People v Torres, 80 N.Y.2d 944).

With respect to the court's Allen charge, defendant failed to preserve his present claims by timely objection at trial and we decline to review in the interest of justice. Even interpreting the charge in the manner defendant suggests, it is clear that the charge was not coercive, as the jury continued to deliberate that day and the next before it found defendant guilty of the first count.

The remaining errors claimed by defendant are either unpreserved or without merit.

Concur — Milonas, J.P., Ellerin, Ross, Asch and Kassal, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Deago

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 1, 1992
188 A.D.2d 276 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. Deago

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KARL DEAGO, Appellant

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

Date published: Dec 1, 1992

Citations

188 A.D.2d 276 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
590 N.Y.S.2d 474

Citing Cases

People v. Batson

Indeed, it is clear that the instructions of which defendant complains were not coercive since the panel…