Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta People v. Gonzales 56 N.Y.2d 1001

← Cases

People v. Gonzales

56 N.Y.2d 1001 Court N.Y. Decision date 1982-06-23 English

Contents

Majority

p. 1001
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gonzalo Gonzales, Appellant.
Argued June 11, 1982;
decided June 23, 1982
p. 1002
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Claude Castro for appellant.
Elizabeth Holtzman, District Attorney (Allan Root, Barbara D. Underwood and Beth S. Lasky of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant’s contention that the trial court committed reversible error in rereading its original charge on certain legal concepts after the jury had requested clarification of those concepts in “layman’s terms” is not properly preserved, as defendant failed to object or except to the trial court’s supplemental charge. Defendant’s failure to make his objection known at a time when the error, if any, could be remedied, precludes review by this court (People v Duncan, 46 NY2d 74 , 80, cert den 442 US 910 ).

We have examined defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cases cited