From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Pless

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 19, 1997
244 A.D.2d 971 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

November 19, 1997

(Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, Mulroy, J. — Assault, 2nd Degree.)

Present — Pine, J. P., Lawton, Wisner, Balio and Fallon, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The contention of defendant that County Court erred in denying him an opportunity to participate in the formulation of responses to two written inquiries from the jury during deliberations is not preserved for our review (see, People v. Starling, 85 N.Y.2d 509, 516). The first note from the jury was marked as an exhibit and read aloud in defendant's presence, and defendant did not object upon being informed of the court's intended response (see, People v. Rivera, 233 A.D.2d 344, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 946). Although the court did not seek input from defense counsel before responding to the second note, the court had informed counsel of its intent to deviate from accepted practice before responding to the note, and defendant did not object to the court's procedure (cf., People v O'Rama, 78 N.Y.2d 270, 278). We decline to exercise our power to review defendant's contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see, CPL 470.15 [a]). We further reject the contentions of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel (see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147; People v. Trait, 139 A.D.2d 937, 938, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 867) and that prosecutorial misconduct on summation warrants reversal (see, People v. Waller, 239 A.D.2d 934). Finally, we conclude that the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe.


Summaries of

People v. Pless

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 19, 1997
244 A.D.2d 971 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. Pless

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ADRIAN E. PLESS, JR.…

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

Date published: Nov 19, 1997

Citations

244 A.D.2d 971 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
665 N.Y.S.2d 495

Citing Cases

People v. Fontanez

Because the court read the notes in open court before responding, "counsel was given notice of [their]…

People v. DePillo

The court's response was a rereading of portions of the original charge, to which there had been no…