From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Carter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 23, 1986
121 A.D.2d 644 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

June 23, 1986

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldman, J.).


Judgment affirmed.

The defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment on the ground that the police returned the stolen property to its owners in violation of Penal Law § 450.10 was properly denied since the police never actually had custody of the property (see, Penal Law § 450.10; People v. Kelly, 62 N.Y.2d 516). Moreover, the stolen property was immediately photographed by the police and those photographs were properly placed in evidence at the trial (see, People v. Angelo, 93 A.D.2d 264).

The defendant's contention that the court failed to charge the jury on circumstantial evidence is unpreserved for appellate review since no request for such a charge was made, nor did he object to the court's failure to give such instructions (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620). In any event, the record establishes that the defendant's claim is meritless.

The court properly instructed the jury concerning the People's burden of proof and the claim that the jury did not follow those instructions lacks merit (see generally, Parker v. Randolph, 442 U.S. 62). Lazer, J.P., Mangano, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Carter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 23, 1986
121 A.D.2d 644 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

People v. Carter

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES CARTER, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 23, 1986

Citations

121 A.D.2d 644 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

People v. Trotty

Contrary to defendant's argument on appeal, the trial court properly denied defendant's alternate motions for…

People v. Lowe

The defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment on the ground that the police returned the stolen property…