In People v. Almodovar, 62 N.Y.2d 126 (1984), the jurors sent a note to the court asking for the legal definition of counts one, two and four. The court gave supplemental instructions detailing the elements of the three counts. The court did not repeat its instructions on justification and defense counsel's request for that instruction, which was made after the jury returned to the jury room, was refused. As the Court of Appeals held in Almodovar, the trial court possesses some discretion in framing its supplemental instructions but must respond meaningfully to the jury's inquiries. The sufficiency of a trial court's response is gauged by the form of the jury's question, which may have to be clarified before it can be answered, the particular issue of which inquiry is made, the supplemental instruction given and the presence or absence of prejudice to the defendant. (Almodovar, at 131-132.) In Almodovar, the Court of Appeals held that it was not error for the court to refuse to go beyond the jury's request. Furthermore, as suggested by Almodovar, the court here did "remind the jurors in its supplemental instructions of defendant's claim that his acts were justified" (id. at 132.)