People v. Heckstall

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Heckstall

76 A.D.2d 913, 429 N.Y.S.2d 40, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12010

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

DecidedJune 23, 1980

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 76 A.D.2d 913 (People v. Heckstall) 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. Heckstall, 76 A.D.2d 913, 429 N.Y.S.2d 40, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12010 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered August 21, 1978, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree and criminally using drug paraphernalia in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. After the jury rendered its verdict the defendant orally alleged that there had been juror misconduct. The trial court instructed the defendant to move upon proper papers (CPL 330.30, 330.40). Nevertheless, he did not. This failure coupled with the vagueness of the alleged misconduct causes us to conclude that the issue must be deemed waived. Margett, J. P., Martuscello, O’Connor and Weinstein, 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, Kings County, rendered August 21, 1978, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree and criminally using drug paraphernalia in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. After the jury rendered its verdict the defendant orally alleged that there had been juror misconduct. The trial court instructed the defendant to move upon proper papers (CPL 330.30, 330.40). Nevertheless, he did not. This failure coupled with the vagueness of the alleged misconduct causes us to conclude that the issue must be deemed waived. Margett, J. P., Martuscello, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

76 A.D.2d 913, 429 N.Y.S.2d 40, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12010, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-heckstall-nyappdiv-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack