| People v Bryant |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 02410 [82 AD3d 1114] |
| March 22, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v OtisBryant, Appellant. |
—[*1] Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, JohnnetteTraill, and Danielle Hartman of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kron, J.),rendered November 10, 2008, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (two counts),criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, and criminal possession of stolenproperty in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the Supreme Court's procedure for handling two jury notesviolated the procedure enunciated by the Court of Appeals in People v O'Rama (78 NY2d270, 277-278 [1991]) is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Ramirez, 15NY3d 824 [2010]; People v Mateo, 53 AD3d 1111, 1112 [2008]; People v Battle,15 AD3d 413, 414 [2005]; People v Mitchell, 2 AD3d 145, 148 [2003]; People vNeal, 268 AD2d 307 [2000]; People v Burgos, 248 AD2d 547 [1998]), and wedecline to reach it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Since the jury merelyrequested readbacks of certain testimony and of the definitions of certain crimes, and to beprovided with certain evidence, the alleged error did not constitute a mode of proceedings errorwhich would obviate the preservation requirement (see People v Starling, 85 NY2d 509[1995]; cf. People v Cook, 85 NY2d 928 [1995]).
Additionally, contrary to the defendant's contention, the fact that his codefendant received alesser sentence following a plea of guilty does not render the defendant's sentence excessiveunder the circumstances of this case (see People v Murad, 55 AD3d 754, 756 [2008];People v Jones, 4 AD3d 796, 797 [2004]; cf. People v Versaggi, 296 AD2d 429,430 [2002]). Dillon, J.P., Covello, Florio and Hall, JJ., concur.