People v. Ceresoli

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Ceresoli

669 N.E.2d 1111, 88 N.Y.2d 925, 646 N.Y.S.2d 789, 1996 N.Y. LEXIS 1514

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 28, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 669 N.E.2d 1111 (People v. Ceresoli) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Ceresoli, 669 N.E.2d 1111, 88 N.Y.2d 925, 646 N.Y.S.2d 789, 1996 N.Y. LEXIS 1514 (N.Y. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

*926 Defendant was charged with criminal possession of a forged instrument and with the theft of $3,500 from the Toccolana Club, a private social club in Rome, New York. After his conviction for grand larceny in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 155.30), defendant moved pursuant to CPL 330.30 to set aside the verdict on the ground of juror misconduct involving a single seated juror. During voir dire, the juror, a resident of Rome, was asked whether he was "familiar with members of the Toccolano Club.” The juror responded: "I just know where it is, not really, no.” It was subsequently established that the juror had decades earlier himself been a nominal member of the club, and two of his relatives were or had been members.

After a hearing on defendant’s motion, the trial court found there was no improper conduct on the part of the juror, and further that the juror’s conduct had not "affected a substantial right of the defendant” (CPL 330.30 [2]). The Appellate Division affirmed. The trial court’s undisturbed factual finding has support in the record and, like the alleged excessiveness of defendant’s sentence, is beyond the scope of our review.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

*926 Defendant was charged with criminal possession of a forged instrument and with the theft of $3,500 from the Toccolana Club, a private social club in Rome, New York. After his conviction for grand larceny in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 155.30), defendant moved pursuant to CPL 330.30 to set aside the verdict on the ground of juror misconduct involving a single seated juror. During voir dire, the juror, a resident of Rome, was asked whether he was "familiar with members of the Toccolano Club.” The juror responded: "I just know where it is, not really, no.” It was subsequently established that the juror had decades earlier himself been a nominal member of the club, and two of his relatives were or had been members.

After a hearing on defendant’s motion, the trial court found there was no improper conduct on the part of the juror, and further that the juror’s conduct had not "affected a substantial right of the defendant” (CPL 330.30 [2]). The Appellate Division affirmed. The trial court’s undisturbed factual finding has support in the record and, like the alleged excessiveness of defendant’s sentence, is beyond the scope of our review.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

669 N.E.2d 1111, 88 N.Y.2d 925, 646 N.Y.S.2d 789, 1996 N.Y. LEXIS 1514, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ceresoli-ny-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack