People v Brown
2005 NYSlipOp 08742
November 14, 2005
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Monday, April 3, 2006


The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v
Bernard Brown, Appellant.

[*1]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), rendered October 24, 2001, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant argues that the judgment of conviction must be set aside because the trial court failed to read to counsel or allow counsel to see the jury's notes requesting certain exhibits and a readback of testimony. The defendant's contention is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Starling, 85 NY2d 509, 516 [1995]; People v Fair, 308 AD2d 597 [2003]; People v Zito, 299 AD2d 569, 570-571 [2002]). Unlike the situation presented recently in People v Kisoon (23 AD3d 18 [2005]), the record reflects, albeit inferentially, that counsel reviewed the jury's notes. Defense counsel neither objected nor responded in the negative to the contrary when the trial justice stated, "I assume you both saw the notes." We decline to review the defendant's argument in the interest of justice (see People v Clark, 298 AD2d 461 [2002]). Luciano, J.P., Mastro, Spolzino and Skelos, JJ., concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.