Opinion
June 9, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ramirez, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
The defendant contends that the trial court coerced the jury into reaching a verdict through an unbalanced supplemental charge. After approximately 2 1/2 hours of deliberation without reaching a verdict, a note was received which indicated that the jury would be unable to reach a unanimous decision. The trial court then gave a supplemental, or so-called "Allen" charge (see, Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492). After additional deliberations of about three hours, the jury returned its verdict. The supplemental instructions were essentially neutral, were directed at the jurors in general, and did not coerce the jurors to reach a certain verdict, or any verdict (see, People v Page, 47 N.Y.2d 968, 970, cert denied 444 U.S. 936; People v Pagan, 45 N.Y.2d 725; People v. Hardy, 109 A.D.2d 802). We have considered the defendant's other contention and find it to be without merit (see, People v. Shaw, 112 A.D.2d 958). Thompson, J.P., Rubin, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.