People v. Harrison

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Harrison

51 A.D.2d 589, 378 N.Y.S.2d 777, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10887

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

DecidedJanuary 26, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 51 A.D.2d 589 (People v. Harrison) 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. Harrison, 51 A.D.2d 589, 378 N.Y.S.2d 777, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10887 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered December 6, 1972, convicting him of assault in the third degree and possession of a weapon, dangerous instrument and appliance, as a misdemeanor, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and indictment dismissed. Notwithstanding the evidence of defendant’s guilt, we believe that the trial court’s disparagement of defense counsel and its undue participation during the course of the trial require that the judgment be reversed (see People v Richburg, 47 AD2d 909; People v Setaro, 44 AD2d 847; People v Askew, 42 AD2d 717; cf. People v Mendes, 3 NY2d 120, 121). Furthermore, since defendant has served his sentence, the indictment should be dismissed (see People v Kvalheim, 17 NY2d 510). Rabin, Acting P. J., Hopkins, Latham, Hargett and Christ, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered December 6, 1972, convicting him of assault in the third degree and possession of a weapon, dangerous instrument and appliance, as a misdemeanor, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and indictment dismissed. Notwithstanding the evidence of defendant’s guilt, we believe that the trial court’s disparagement of defense counsel and its undue participation during the course of the trial require that the judgment be reversed (see People v Richburg, 47 AD2d 909; People v Setaro, 44 AD2d 847; People v Askew, 42 AD2d 717; cf. People v Mendes, 3 NY2d 120, 121). Furthermore, since defendant has served his sentence, the indictment should be dismissed (see People v Kvalheim, 17 NY2d 510). Rabin, Acting P. J., Hopkins, Latham, Hargett and Christ, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 589, 378 N.Y.S.2d 777, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10887, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-harrison-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack