Opinion
February 2, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golia, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the court's Allen charge ( see, Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492) to the deadlocked jury was improper. We disagree. The court's charge was neutral, directed to the jurors in general, and did not coerce a verdict or a specific result ( see, People v. Ford, 78 N.Y.2d 878; People v. Pagan, 45 N.Y.2d 725; People v. Kinard, 215 A.D.2d 591). The fact that the jurors requested several more readbacks and deliberated for several more hours further negates the defendant's claim that the charge was coercive ( see, People v. Cannon, 236 A.D.2d 294; People v. Diaz, 197 A.D.2d 379).
The defendants contention that the Allen charge constituted burden-shifting is unpreserved for appellate review ( see, CPL 470.05) and, in any event, is without merit ( see, People v. Lara, 224 A.D.2d 332).
Mangano, P.J., Joy, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.