People v. Deblinger

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Deblinger

267 A.D.2d 395, 700 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13151

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

DecidedDecember 20, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 267 A.D.2d 395 (People v. Deblinger) 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. Deblinger, 267 A.D.2d 395, 700 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13151 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), dated November 6, 1998, which granted that [396]*396branch of the defendant’s motion which was pursuant to CPL 440.10 (1) (h), in effect, to set aside a verdict of the same court finding him guilty of sodomy in the first degree, sexual abuse in the first degree (five counts), sexual abuse in the third degree (five counts), incest, and endangering the welfare of a child, and ordered a new trial.

Ordered that the order is affirmed.

We agree with the Supreme Court that allowing the verdict to stand under the circumstances of this case would violate due process (see, CPL 440.10 [1] [h]; Sanders v Sullivan, 863 F2d 218; People v Pelchat, 62 NY2d 97, 105; People v Figueroa, 167 AD2d 101, 104). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly ordered a new trial. Santucci, J. P., Joy, Goldstein and Feuerstein, JJ., concur. [See, 179 Misc 2d 35.]

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

—Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), dated November 6, 1998, which granted that [396]*396branch of the defendant’s motion which was pursuant to CPL 440.10 (1) (h), in effect, to set aside a verdict of the same court finding him guilty of sodomy in the first degree, sexual abuse in the first degree (five counts), sexual abuse in the third degree (five counts), incest, and endangering the welfare of a child, and ordered a new trial.

Ordered that the order is affirmed.

We agree with the Supreme Court that allowing the verdict to stand under the circumstances of this case would violate due process (see, CPL 440.10 [1] [h]; Sanders v Sullivan, 863 F2d 218; People v Pelchat, 62 NY2d 97, 105; People v Figueroa, 167 AD2d 101, 104). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly ordered a new trial. Santucci, J. P., Joy, Goldstein and Feuerstein, JJ., concur. [See, 179 Misc 2d 35.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D.2d 395, 700 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13151, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-deblinger-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack