From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Santiago

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 20, 1997
239 A.D.2d 253 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

May 20, 1997

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Robert Cohen, J.).


The evidence against defendant was legally sufficient and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. We see no reason to disturb the jury's credibility determinations.

The trial court's prompt curative action regarding the prosecutor's attempts to elicit testimony from defendant characterizing the undercover officer as a liar averted any prejudice to defendant ( People v. Robertson, 192 A.D.2d 447, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 725).

The trial court's response to a jury note that indicated that the jury desired an additional hour of deliberations was not coercive, and the court properly denied defendant's request that deliberations instead be suspended for the night. The response, given with defendant's approval, specifically instructed that there were no time restrictions on deliberations, and simply honored the jury's request to continue deliberating ( People v. Townes, 141 A.D.2d 876, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 925).

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Wallach, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Santiago

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 20, 1997
239 A.D.2d 253 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. Santiago

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. AMADOR SANTIAGO…

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

Date published: May 20, 1997

Citations

239 A.D.2d 253 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
657 N.Y.S.2d 188

Citing Cases

People v. Muhammad

In this regard, we note that the law in New York (Penal Law 120.05) and the law in New Jersey (NJ Stat Ann…