Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Quentin Briggs, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2009-04-14
Citations: 61 A.D.3d 770
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Quentin Briggs, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 61
Pages: 770–771

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Quentin Briggs, Appellant.
[876 NYS2d 654]

Opinion:
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowling, J.), rendered June 9, 2005, convicting him of assault in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he was denied a fair trial because the complaining witness made an unprompted, in-court identification of the defendant's brother as an accomplice in the assault is not preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]).
The defendant's contention that he was denied a fair trial because the Supreme Court misinterpreted two jury notes and gave readbacks which were prejudicial to him is without merit. The court's interpretation of the jury's notes was reasonable, and it provided meaningful responses to them (see People v Almodovar, 62 NY2d 126, 131 [1984], citing People v Malloy, 55 NY2d 296, 301 [1982], cert denied 459 US 847 [1982]). In addition, the court's rulings and instructions during voir dire with respect to defendant counsel's comments regarding the lack of certain evidence were proper and did not prejudice the defendant (see People v Francis, 49 AD3d 552, 553 [2008]).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80, 85-86 [1982]).
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]). Spolzino, J.P, Florio, Covello and Eng, JJ., concur.