People v. Brown

53 A.D.2d 867, 385 N.Y.S.2d 493, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13700
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 6, 1976·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered January 30, 1973, convicting him of robbery in the second degree and grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and new trial ordered. The defendant was convicted of robbery in the second degree and grand larceny in the third degree after a jury trial. The excessive interjection of the Trial Judge, by questions and comment, deprived the defendant of a fair trial. The defendant points out that the record establishes that the Trial Judge asked 76% of the questions on direct examination, 42% of the questions on cross-examination, and 55% of the total questions asked. A Trial Judge indulging in such conduct interferes with the orderly development of the case by preempting the role of counsel (see People v Woods, 39 NY2d 852, revg on the dissenting memorandum of Mr. Justice Martuscello in 48 AD2d 708; People v Matos, 46 AD2d 903; People v Sostre, 37 AD2d 574). Hence, a reversal is mandated. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Titone and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Brown, 53 A.D.2d 867, 385 N.Y.S.2d 493, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13700 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

53 A.D.2d 867 (People v. Brown) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Tom
73 A.D.2d 538 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)