Opinion
2003-04308
January 18, 2005.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered September 7, 2003, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (two counts), and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Before: Schmidt, J.P., Adams, Cozier and S. Miller, JJ., concur.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the County Court's supplemental Allen charge ( see Allen v. United States, 164 US 492) was coercive, imbalanced, and impermissibly shifted the burden of proof to him by requiring jurors to provide an explanation for their respective positions. However, considered as a whole, the charge was not coercive and struck a fair balance between encouraging jurors to attempt to reach a unanimous verdict and not to abandon their conscientiously-held beliefs ( see People v. Jolly, 282 AD2d 474, 475; People v. Davis, 259 AD2d 627, 627-628; People v. Kendrick, 256 AD2d 420, 421; People v. McGriff, 254 AD2d 503, 504; cf. People v. Aponte, 2 NY3d 304).
Further, the charge did not impermissibly shift the burden of proof to the defendant by requiring jurors to provide an explanation for their respective positions ( cf. People v. Antommarchi, 80 NY2d 247, 252-253; People v. Henry, 283 AD2d 587, 588; People v. Diaz, 245 AD2d 526, 527).