LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

PEOPLE v SOTOMAYER Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CourtCode: AP, CourtName: NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS, Plaintiff: PEOPLE, State: NEW YORK, UniqueCaseRef: NE>AP>079_1029, Verdict, Ny2d, Appellant, Memorandum, Jury, Charges, Judge, Respondent, Verdict Sheet, Determination, Deliberating, Taylor, Verdicts Thereon, Parties, Consent, Nimmons, Risk, Deliberative Process, Supra, Ultimate Guilt Determination, Considered Harmless, Brooks, Owens, Chief Judge Wachtler, Judges Kaye, Titone, Hancock, Bellacosa, Yesawich Concur, Judge Simons , ContentID: 120249023

Case Documents
1 2000-05 OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 120933
1 pages
HTML
Total Documents: 1 document , 1 page.    CAUTION.    PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS A ONE PAGE CASE.
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . OPINION

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
NY2D
APPELLANT
MEMORANDUM
JURY
CHARGES
JUDGE
RESPONDENT
VERDICT SHEET
DETERMINATION
DELIBERATING
TAYLOR
VERDICTS THEREON
PARTIES
CONSENT
NIMMONS
RISK
DELIBERATIVE PROCESS
SUPRA
ULTIMATE GUILT DETERMINATION
CONSIDERED HARMLESS
BROOKS
OWENS
CHIEF JUDGE WACHTLER
JUDGES KAYE
TITONE
HANCOCK
BELLACOSA
YESAWICH CONCUR
JUDGE SIMONS


  THE PEOPLE &C., APPELLANT, v. DAVID SOTOMAYER, RESPONDENT.

    79 N.Y.2d 1029, 594 N.E.2d 925, 584 N.Y.S.2d 431 (1992).
    May 12, 1992

   2 No. 58
   Decided May 12, 1992
     _________________________________________________________________

   This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
   publication in the New York Reports.

   Barbara Thomashower, for Appellant.
   Carol A. Zeldin, for Respondent.

   MEMORANDUM:

   The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

   It was reversible error for the trial court to submit to the jury a
   verdict sheet which, in addition to enumerating the crimes charged and
   possible verdicts, instructed the jury on the order in which the
   charges should be considered and the effect of a determination that
   the prosecution failed to disprove justification. Pursuant to Criminal
   Procedure Law 310.20, a deliberating jury may be provided with a
   written list itemizing the offenses charged and the possible verdicts
   thereon. Without the parties' consent, it was error in this case to
   submit a verdict sheet that recited more (see People v Taylor, 76 NY2d
   873; People v Nimmons, 72 NY2d 830). Such an error created a risk that
   the jury's deliberative process would be "unfairly skewed" (Taylor,
   supra, at 874). Because the ultimate guilt determination was brought
   into question, such an error cannot be considered harmless (see People
   v Brooks, 70 NY2d 896, 898; People v Owens, 69 NY2d 585, 591-592).

   * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

   Order affirmed in a memorandum. Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Kaye,
   Titone, Hancock, Bellacosa and Yesawich concur. Judge Simons took no
   part.
SNIPPETS:
  • THE PEOPLE &C., APPELLANT, v. DAVID SOTOMAYER, RESPONDENT.
  • This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
  • It was reversible error for the trial court to submit to the jury a verdict sheet which, in
  • Pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law 310.20, a deliberating jury may be provided with a written
  • Without the parties' consent, it was error in this case to submit a verdict sheet that
  • Such an error created a risk that the jury's deliberative process would be "unfairly skewed"
  • Because the ultimate guilt determination was brought into question, such an error cannot be
  • Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Kaye, Titone, Hancock, Bellacosa and Yesawich concur.
  • Judge Simons took no part.
  •    |