The Second Department determined the trial court properly gave the Galbo charge in this burglary case:
… Supreme Court [did not] in giving the jury a Galbo charge (see People v Galbo, 218 NY 283) to the effect that the defendant’s guilt of burglary could be inferred from his recent, unexplained, and exclusive possession of the stolen items. The prosecution presented both circumstantial and direct evidence, including admissions made by the defendant during a series of telephone calls, that the defendant committed the burglary and possessed the items, and there was no reasonable view of the evidence whereby the jury could have found that the defendant unlawfully possessed the property without also finding that he committed the burglary … . People v Jones, 2018 NY Slip Op 03703, Second Dept 5-23-18
CRIMINAL LAW (BURGLARY, TRIAL COURT PROPERLY GAVE THE GALBO JURY INSTRUCTION RE DEFENDANT’S POSSESSION OF STOLEN PROPERTY IN THIS BURGLARY CASE (SECOND DEPT))/EVIDENCE (CRIMINAL LAW, BURGLARY, TRIAL COURT PROPERLY GAVE THE GALBO JURY INSTRUCTION RE DEFENDANT’S POSSESSION OF STOLEN PROPERTY IN THIS BURGLARY CASE (SECOND DEPT))/BURGLARY (JURY INSTRUCTIONS, TRIAL COURT PROPERLY GAVE THE GALBO JURY INSTRUCTION RE DEFENDANT’S POSSESSION OF STOLEN PROPERTY IN THIS BURGLARY CASE (SECOND DEPT))/JURY INSTRUCTIONS (BURGLARY, TRIAL COURT PROPERLY GAVE THE GALBO JURY INSTRUCTION RE DEFENDANT’S POSSESSION OF STOLEN PROPERTY IN THIS BURGLARY CASE (SECOND DEPT))/GALBO CHARGE (BURGLARY, TRIAL COURT PROPERLY GAVE THE GALBO JURY INSTRUCTION RE DEFENDANT’S POSSESSION OF STOLEN PROPERTY IN THIS BURGLARY CASE (SECOND DEPT))