People v. Nash

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Nash

267 A.D.2d 334, 699 N.Y.S.2d 887, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12841

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

DecidedDecember 13, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 267 A.D.2d 334 (People v. Nash) 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. Nash, 267 A.D.2d 334, 699 N.Y.S.2d 887, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12841 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruchelsman, J.), rendered February 25, 1997, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

[335]*335Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.

We agree with the defendant’s contention that the erroneous denial of his challenge for cause to a prospective juror constitutes reversible error because he had exhausted all of his peremptory challenges before the completion of jury selection (see, CPL 270.20 [2]; People v Torpey, 63 NY2d 361, 365; People v White, 260 AD2d 413; People v Molinari, 252 AD2d 532).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Santucci and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruchelsman, J.), rendered February 25, 1997, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

[335]*335Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.

We agree with the defendant’s contention that the erroneous denial of his challenge for cause to a prospective juror constitutes reversible error because he had exhausted all of his peremptory challenges before the completion of jury selection (see, CPL 270.20 [2]; People v Torpey, 63 NY2d 361, 365; People v White, 260 AD2d 413; People v Molinari, 252 AD2d 532).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Santucci and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D.2d 334, 699 N.Y.S.2d 887, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12841, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-nash-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack