People v. Lemmo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Lemmo

38 A.D.2d 565, 328 N.Y.S.2d 377, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2821

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

DecidedDecember 6, 1971

StatusPublished

This text of 38 A.D.2d 565 (People v. Lemmo) 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. Lemmo, 38 A.D.2d 565, 328 N.Y.S.2d 377, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2821 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered April 30, 1971, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and sentencing him to an indeterminate term with a maximum of seven years upon the first degree conviction and to an unconditional discharge upon the third degree conviction. Judgment affirmed. No opinion. Latham, Shapiro and Brennan, JJ., concur; Gulotta, J., dissents and votes to remand the case to the Criminal Term for [566]*566a hearing in accordance with the memorandum hereinbelow and to hold the appeal in abeyance in the interim, in which Rabin, P. J., concurs. I am of the opinion that the 'Trial .Judge erred in refusing to examine the jury about certain prejudicial articles published during the course of the trial in two well-known New York newspapers and brought to the court’s attention immediately by defense counsel. An investigation should have been conducted to determine (1) whether any jurors had seen the articles and, if so, (2) whether they were influenced against defendant by what they had read (cf. People v. Rivera, 26 N Y 2d 304). Since this is a recent conviction and the matter is probably still fresh in the minds of the jurors, the case should be remanded for a hearing on these two questions and the appeal held in abeyance pending findings in connection therewith.

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 April 30, 1971, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and sentencing him to an indeterminate term with a maximum of seven years upon the first degree conviction and to an unconditional discharge upon the third degree conviction. Judgment affirmed. No opinion. Latham, Shapiro and Brennan, JJ., concur; Gulotta, J., dissents and votes to remand the case to the Criminal Term for [566]*566a hearing in accordance with the memorandum hereinbelow and to hold the appeal in abeyance in the interim, in which Rabin, P. J., concurs. I am of the opinion that the 'Trial .Judge erred in refusing to examine the jury about certain prejudicial articles published during the course of the trial in two well-known New York newspapers and brought to the court’s attention immediately by defense counsel. An investigation should have been conducted to determine (1) whether any jurors had seen the articles and, if so, (2) whether they were influenced against defendant by what they had read (cf. People v. Rivera, 26 N Y 2d 304). Since this is a recent conviction and the matter is probably still fresh in the minds of the jurors, the case should be remanded for a hearing on these two questions and the appeal held in abeyance pending findings in connection therewith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.2d 565, 328 N.Y.S.2d 377, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2821, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lemmo-nyappdiv-1971.