People v. Burley

138 A.D.3d 420, 27 N.Y.S.3d 858
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 5, 2016·No. 722 4238/10·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alexander W. Hunter, Jr., J.), rendered February 11, 2014, convicting defend *421 ant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, and sentencing him to a term of five years’ probation, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the matter remanded for a new trial.

Reversal is unavoidable, because the file contains a jury note, making a substantive legal inquiry, that was marked as an exhibit but not referred to on the record in any manner. There is no evidence that it was revealed to counsel, or that the court gave the jury any response (see People v Silva, 24 NY3d 294, 300 [2014]). Accordingly, the record does not show that the court fulfilled its “core responsibility” of giving counsel “meaningful notice” of the contents of the note, and of providing a “meaningful response” to the jury (People v Kisoon, 8 NY3d 129, 134 [2007]).

Since a new trial is required, we find it unnecessary to reach any other issues (see People v Evans, 94 NY2d 499, 504-505 [2000]).

Concur — Tom, J.P., Friedman, Richter, Gische and Gesmer, JJ.

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

People v. Burley, 138 A.D.3d 420, 27 N.Y.S.3d 858 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

138 A.D.3d 420 (People v. Burley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Jamison
2024 NY Slip Op 02286 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)