The People, etc., respondent, v. Evon Robinson, appellant.

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

The People, etc., respondent, v. Evon Robinson, appellant.

2009-01622 (Ind.No. 702/06)

Decided: November 30, 2010

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P. DANIEL D. ANGIOLILLO SHERI S. ROMAN SANDRA L. SGROI, JJ. Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Erin R. Collins of counsel), for appellant. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Nicoletta J. Caferri, and Laura T. Ross of counsel), for respondent.

Argued-October 28, 2010


Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lasak, J.), rendered February 4, 2009, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and tampering with physical evidence (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

In determining whether the trial court has responded meaningfully to the jury's request for further instruction (see CPL 310.30), the factors to be evaluated are the form of the jury's question, the particular issue of which inquiry is made, the supplemental instruction actually given, and the presence or absence of prejudice to the defendant (see People v. Almodovar, 62 N.Y.2d 126, 131-132;  People v. Malloy, 55 N.Y.2d 296, 302, cert denied 459 U.S. 847;  People v. Ariza, 77 AD3d 844).   Under all the facts of this case, the defendant was not prejudiced when the trial court declined to deliver the specific additional charge he requested.

Furthermore, under the particular facts of this case, the defendant's remaining contentions do not require a reversal or modification of the judgment.



Matthew G. Kiernan

Clerk of the Court

Copied to clipboard