People v. Lugo-Rosado

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Lugo-Rosado

83 A.D.3d 1529, 921 N.Y.S.2d 608

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

DecidedApril 29, 2011

StatusPublished

This text of 83 A.D.3d 1529 (People v. Lugo-Rosado) 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. Lugo-Rosado, 83 A.D.3d 1529, 921 N.Y.S.2d 608 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Patrick J. Cunningham, J.), rendered August 9, 1991. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of conspiracy in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law and a new trial is granted on count four of the indictment.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of conspiracy in the second degree (Penal Law § 105.15). We agree with defendant that reversal is required. County Court’s instructions to the jury on reasonable doubt unconstitutionally diminished the People’s burden of proof, and defendant was thereby deprived of a fair trial (see People v Docen-Perez, 197 AD2d 865 [1993]; People v Towndrow, 187 AD2d 194, 195-196 [1993], lv dismissed 81 NY2d 1021 [1993] ; People v Geddes, 186 AD2d 993 [1992]; see generally Victor v Nebraska, 511 US 1, 5 [1994], reh denied 511 US 1101 [1994] ; Sullivan v Louisiana, 508 US 275, 280-281 [1993]). In light of our determination, we need not address defendant’s remaining contentions. Present—Scudder, P.J., Fahey, Carni, Sconiers and Martoche, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Patrick J. Cunningham, J.), rendered August 9, 1991. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of conspiracy in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law and a new trial is granted on count four of the indictment.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of conspiracy in the second degree (Penal Law § 105.15). We agree with defendant that reversal is required. County Court’s instructions to the jury on reasonable doubt unconstitutionally diminished the People’s burden of proof, and defendant was thereby deprived of a fair trial (see People v Docen-Perez, 197 AD2d 865 [1993]; People v Towndrow, 187 AD2d 194, 195-196 [1993], lv dismissed 81 NY2d 1021 [1993] ; People v Geddes, 186 AD2d 993 [1992]; see generally Victor v Nebraska, 511 US 1, 5 [1994], reh denied 511 US 1101 [1994] ; Sullivan v Louisiana, 508 US 275, 280-281 [1993]). In light of our determination, we need not address defendant’s remaining contentions. Present—Scudder, P.J., Fahey, Carni, Sconiers and Martoche, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 A.D.3d 1529, 921 N.Y.S.2d 608, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lugo-rosado-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack