Opinion
April 30, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Sheindlin, J.).
Defendant's contention that he was unduly prejudiced by the court's consciousness of guilt charge is without merit, since the charge, when viewed in its entirety, did not mislead or confuse the jurors ( People v. Wise, 204 A.D.2d 133, 135, lv denied 83 N.Y.2d 973). The court incorrectly suggested that the defense conceded that defendant had offered to return the stolen property and returned the complainant's stolen earring. However, in context, the jurors could not reasonably have been led to believe that defendant had admitted to possessing the stolen property and to returning the earring where his position, previously summarized by the court, was that he had not committed the crime in the first place and had asked complainant to drop the charges because they were false.
The court's Sandoval ruling was a proper exercise of discretion.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Ellerin, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.