People v. DeJesus

274 A.D.2d 400, 711 N.Y.S.2d 754, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7561
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 3, 2000·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gary, J.), rendered November 5, 1998, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.

The defendant contends, and the People correctly concede, that he was denied his right to a public trial (see, US Const 6th Amend; Civil Rights Law § 12; Judiciary Law § 4), because the trial court excluded his fiancée from the courtroom during the testimony of the undercover officer. At the hearing conducted pursuant to People v Hinton (31 NY2d 71, cert denied 410 US 911), the People failed to establish that the defendant’s fiancée posed a threat to the safety of the undercover officer, as there was no evidence that she either resided or worked in the neighborhood where the officer was actively engaged in buy- and-bust operations. As the closure order was broader than [401]*401necessary and not supported by the record, the defendant is entitled to a new trial (see, People v Rentas, 253 AD2d 469; People v Vargas, 244 AD2d 367; People v Scott, 237 AD2d 544; People v Gayle, 237 AD2d 532; People v Pankey, 219 AD2d 737). Bracken, J. P., Santucci, McGinity and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

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

People v. DeJesus, 274 A.D.2d 400, 711 N.Y.S.2d 754, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7561 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

274 A.D.2d 400 (People v. DeJesus) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Hector
31 A.D.3d 464 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
People v. Heslop
307 A.D.2d 975 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)