From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Punter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 7, 1995
222 A.D.2d 242 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

December 7, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Martin Marcus, J.).


Defendant's current claims of improper admission of evidence of his pre-arrest silence are unpreserved (CPL 470.05). In any event, defendant's evasive answers were properly admitted as evidence of his consciousness of guilt ( People v Holland, 174 A.D.2d 508, 509-510, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 1011). As additional reference to defendant's pre-trial silence was strategically elicited by defense counsel on direct examination of the defense witnesses, the prosecutor properly addressed the matter on cross-examination of those witnesses ( People v Lewis, 177 A.D.2d 421, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 949).

The court's justification charge as a whole conveyed the appropriate legal principles ( People v Powell, 168 A.D.2d 393, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 972), and it is clear from the record that the jury duly considered the defense. In this connection, the trial court's response to the jury's request for a definition of the term "retreat" was an appropriate and meaningful response ( see, People v Ellis, 183 A.D.2d 534, 536, affd 81 N.Y.2d 854).

We perceive no abuse of discretion in sentencing.

Defendant's additional claims of error are both unpreserved and without merit.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Ross and Asch, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Punter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 7, 1995
222 A.D.2d 242 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Punter

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MALCOLM PUNTER…

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

Date published: Dec 7, 1995

Citations

222 A.D.2d 242 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
635 N.Y.S.2d 14

Citing Cases

People v. Otero

Defendant's claim that the prosecutor should not have been permitted to question him about his pre-arrest…

People v. Carrington

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant's claim that the prosecutor improperly cross-examined…