People v. Chase

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Chase

225 A.D.2d 789, 639 N.Y.2d 853, 639 N.Y.S.2d 853, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3156

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

DecidedMarch 25, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 225 A.D.2d 789 (People v. Chase) 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. Chase, 225 A.D.2d 789, 639 N.Y.2d 853, 639 N.Y.S.2d 853, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3156 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

The defendant was convicted of assault in the second degree arising out of an incident during which he pushed a police officer into the path of an oncoming car at Kennedy Airport. The police officer, who was struck by the car, sustained injuries to his neck and back. During the jury deliberations, the jury sent a note to the court asking whether "the lack of corroboration (witnesses) constitute [sic] a reasonable doubt”. The defendant requested that the court reread the reasonable doubt charge, but the court responded to the note with its own answer: [790]*790"there’s no legal requirement that any witness’s testimony be corroborated in order to satisfy the People’s burden”. The court also told the jurors that if this response was insufficient, they should feel free to request further instruction.

Given the straightforward nature of both the inquiry and the response, and the fact that the jury did not ask for further instruction, the court’s response to the note was meaningful and does not require reversal (see, CPL 310.30; People v Malloy, 55 NY2d 296, cert denied 459 US 847).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Balletta, J. P., Sullivan, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

The defendant was convicted of assault in the second degree arising out of an incident during which he pushed a police officer into the path of an oncoming car at Kennedy Airport. The police officer, who was struck by the car, sustained injuries to his neck and back. During the jury deliberations, the jury sent a note to the court asking whether "the lack of corroboration (witnesses) constitute [sic] a reasonable doubt”. The defendant requested that the court reread the reasonable doubt charge, but the court responded to the note with its own answer: [790]*790"there’s no legal requirement that any witness’s testimony be corroborated in order to satisfy the People’s burden”. The court also told the jurors that if this response was insufficient, they should feel free to request further instruction.

Given the straightforward nature of both the inquiry and the response, and the fact that the jury did not ask for further instruction, the court’s response to the note was meaningful and does not require reversal (see, CPL 310.30; People v Malloy, 55 NY2d 296, cert denied 459 US 847).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Balletta, J. P., Sullivan, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 A.D.2d 789, 639 N.Y.2d 853, 639 N.Y.S.2d 853, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3156, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-chase-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack