Opinion
July 25, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Finnegan, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the record reveals that the trial court did not relinquish control over the jury deliberations, thereby depriving the defendant of his right to a proper trial by jury (cf., People v. Ahmed, 66 N.Y.2d 307, rearg denied 67 N.Y.2d 647). The trial court's statements, which merely informed the jurors in an impartial and neutral manner that they would be sequestered for the evening, did not constitute, under the circumstances present, an attempt to coerce or compel the jury to reach a prompt verdict (see, People v. Pagan, 45 N.Y.2d 725; People v. Sharff, 38 N.Y.2d 751).
We find that the sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Thompson, J.P., Balletta, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.