People v. Ocasio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ocasio

161 A.D.2d 526, 555 N.Y.S.2d 795, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6543

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

DecidedMay 29, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 161 A.D.2d 526 (People v. Ocasio) 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. Ocasio, 161 A.D.2d 526, 555 N.Y.S.2d 795, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6543 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Allen Murray Myers, J.), rendered July 14, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminally possessing a hypodermic instrument and sentencing him to concurrent terms of imprisonment of from 4Vá to 9 years, and six months, respectively, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the matter remanded for a new trial.

Absent the defendant’s consent, copies of statutory material may not be given to the jury, even in response to a request from the jury. It is now well established that a violation of this rule, as is the case here, requires reversal irrespective of prejudice to the defendant. (People v Nimmons, 72 NY2d 830; People v Sanders, 70 NY2d 837; People v Owens, 69 NY2d 585.) As the People forthrightly concede, the conviction must be reversed and the matter remanded for a new trial.

In view of this disposition, it is unnecessary to consider the other arguments raised by defendant. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Ellerin and Smith, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Allen Murray Myers, J.), rendered July 14, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminally possessing a hypodermic instrument and sentencing him to concurrent terms of imprisonment of from 4Vá to 9 years, and six months, respectively, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the matter remanded for a new trial.

Absent the defendant’s consent, copies of statutory material may not be given to the jury, even in response to a request from the jury. It is now well established that a violation of this rule, as is the case here, requires reversal irrespective of prejudice to the defendant. (People v Nimmons, 72 NY2d 830; People v Sanders, 70 NY2d 837; People v Owens, 69 NY2d 585.) As the People forthrightly concede, the conviction must be reversed and the matter remanded for a new trial.

In view of this disposition, it is unnecessary to consider the other arguments raised by defendant. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Ellerin and Smith, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

161 A.D.2d 526, 555 N.Y.S.2d 795, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6543, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ocasio-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack