People v. Bentz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bentz

232 A.D.2d 498, 648 N.Y.S.2d 642, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10132

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 15, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 232 A.D.2d 498 (People v. Bentz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Bentz, 232 A.D.2d 498, 648 N.Y.S.2d 642, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10132 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County (Nelson, J.), rendered October 12, 1993, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.

The trial court erred in refusing to dismiss a prospective juror for cause when that juror did not unequivocally state that he would not be influenced by his feelings and would render an impartial verdict (see, People v Blyden, 55 NY2d 73, 78). Because the defense counsel then exercised a peremptory challenge against that prospective juror, and eventually exhausted his allotment of peremptory challenges, the defendant’s conviction must be reversed (see, People v Torpey, 63 NY2d 361; People v Hewitt, 189 AD2d 781). O’Brien, J. P., Copertino, Santucci and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County (Nelson, J.), rendered October 12, 1993, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.

The trial court erred in refusing to dismiss a prospective juror for cause when that juror did not unequivocally state that he would not be influenced by his feelings and would render an impartial verdict (see, People v Blyden, 55 NY2d 73, 78). Because the defense counsel then exercised a peremptory challenge against that prospective juror, and eventually exhausted his allotment of peremptory challenges, the defendant’s conviction must be reversed (see, People v Torpey, 63 NY2d 361; People v Hewitt, 189 AD2d 781). O’Brien, J. P., Copertino, Santucci and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

232 A.D.2d 498, 648 N.Y.S.2d 642, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bentz-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack