PEOPLE v. GONZALEZ (2010)

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldberg, J.), rendered February 19, 2008, convicting him of robbery in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the trial court's Allen charge (see Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492, 17 S.Ct. 154, 41 L.Ed. 528) was improper is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2];  People v. Franklin, 54 A.D.3d 964, 863 N.Y.S.2d 602).   In any event, contrary to the defendant's contention, the charge, on the whole, was balanced and neutral (see People v. McKenzie, 48 A.D.3d 594, 595, 852 N.Y.S.2d 217;  People v. Kendrick, 256 A.D.2d 420, 421, 682 N.Y.S.2d 234).   The court's instructions were directed at the jurors in general, and “did not urge that a dissenting juror abandon his or her own conviction, attempt to coerce or compel the jury to reach a particular verdict, or shame the jury into reaching a verdict” (People v. McKenzie, 48 A.D.3d at 595, 852 N.Y.S.2d 217;  see People v. Gonzales, 281 A.D.2d 432, 721 N.Y.S.2d 772;  People v. Perdomo, 204 A.D.2d 358, 611 N.Y.S.2d 560).

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.