People v. Figueroa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Figueroa

4 A.D.3d 118, 770 N.Y.S.2d 865

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

DecidedFebruary 5, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 4 A.D.3d 118 (People v. Figueroa) 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. Figueroa, 4 A.D.3d 118, 770 N.Y.S.2d 865 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Megan Tallmer, J.), rendered October 10, 2001, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted robbery in the first degree and attempted assault in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 15 years and 60 days, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

[119]*119After the trial was interrupted by the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the court properly exercised its discretion when it denied defendant’s request for an inquiry as to whether those events had affected any of the jurors’ ability to continue serving. There were no indications that any juror possessed a state of mind that would prevent the rendering of an impartial verdict (see generally People v Buford, 69 NY2d 290 [1987]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Buckley,P.J., Andrias, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Megan Tallmer, J.), rendered October 10, 2001, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted robbery in the first degree and attempted assault in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 15 years and 60 days, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

[119]*119After the trial was interrupted by the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the court properly exercised its discretion when it denied defendant’s request for an inquiry as to whether those events had affected any of the jurors’ ability to continue serving. There were no indications that any juror possessed a state of mind that would prevent the rendering of an impartial verdict (see generally People v Buford, 69 NY2d 290 [1987]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Buckley,P.J., Andrias, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 A.D.3d 118, 770 N.Y.S.2d 865, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-figueroa-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack