People v. Cubino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Cubino

222 A.D.2d 346, 635 N.Y.S.2d 625, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13748

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

DecidedDecember 28, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 222 A.D.2d 346 (People v. Cubino) 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. Cubino, 222 A.D.2d 346, 635 N.Y.S.2d 625, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13748 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinions

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena Uviller, J.), rendered June 17, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the second degree and criminal trespass in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent prison terms of 5 to 10 years and 1 year, respectively, affirmed.

It was not error for the court to instruct the jury that in deciding a case, "[p]roof beyond a reasonable doubt * * * is the quality and the amount of proof that you would require before you made an important decision concerning your own lives.” This statement, describing the jurors’ reasoning process in assessing the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, is indistinguishable from the language we approved in People v Serrano (170 AD2d 269, lv denied 77 NY2d 1000) and People v Thomas (210 AD2d 10, lv denied 85 NY2d 867), and was accompanied by other instructions that, read as a whole, conveyed the proper standard. Concur — Kupferman and Asch, JJ. Mazzarelli, J., concurs in a memorandum; Murphy, P. J., and Ellerin, J., dissent in a memorandum by Murphy, P. J., all as follows:

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena Uviller, J.), rendered June 17, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the second degree and criminal trespass in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent prison terms of 5 to 10 years and 1 year, respectively, affirmed.

It was not error for the court to instruct the jury that in deciding a case, "[p]roof beyond a reasonable doubt * * * is the quality and the amount of proof that you would require before you made an important decision concerning your own lives.” This statement, describing the jurors’ reasoning process in assessing the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, is indistinguishable from the language we approved in People v Serrano (170 AD2d 269, lv denied 77 NY2d 1000) and People v Thomas (210 AD2d 10, lv denied 85 NY2d 867), and was accompanied by other instructions that, read as a whole, conveyed the proper standard. Concur — Kupferman and Asch, JJ. Mazzarelli, J., concurs in a memorandum; Murphy, P. J., and Ellerin, J., dissent in a memorandum by Murphy, P. J., all as follows:

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

222 A.D.2d 346, 635 N.Y.S.2d 625, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13748, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cubino-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack