Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Robert TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William A. Wetzel, J.), rendered March 17, 2003, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and two counts of assault in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 15 years concurrent with two consecutive terms of 7 years, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly exercised its discretion in granting the deliberating jury's request to take notes during readbacks and supplemental instructions. Although defendant objected to the court's decision to permit the jury to take notes, he did not object to the court's cautionary instructions or suggest different language. Accordingly, defendant's challenge to the adequacy of those instructions is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the court's instructions were adequate in that they conveyed the substance of the cautions set forth by the Court of Appeals in People v. Hues, 92 N.Y.2d 413, 419, 681 N.Y.S.2d 779, 704 N.E.2d 546 [1998].
The court properly denied defendant's request for a missing witness charge. The record supports the court's conclusion that the witness could not provide any material, noncumulative testimony (see People v. Gonzalez, 68 N.Y.2d 424, 427-428, 509 N.Y.S.2d 796, 502 N.E.2d 583 [1986] ).
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: April 12, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)