Opinion
March 26, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.).
Defendant's guilt was proven by legally sufficient evidence and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence ( see, People v Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490).
The court's pre-voir dire instructions to the jury do not require reversal. Although the court was ill-advised in going into unnecessary detail as to the evidence that the prosecutor intended to offer at trial and the possibility of a "contrary" view, the court's additional explicit instructions to the jurors, that the evidence will come "from the witness stand * * * not me" and that a defendant in a criminal case has no burden to prove anything, were sufficient to dispel any prejudice to defendant. The court did not give the jurors a list of the elements of the charges ( cf., People v Townsend, 67 N.Y.2d 815), and the court's preliminary instructions were otherwise balanced ( cf., People v Compton, 119 A.D.2d 473).
We perceive no abuse of discretion in sentencing.
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Ellerin, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.