People v. Torres

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Torres

20 N.Y.3d 890

New York Court of Appeals·Decided November 20, 2012·No. Appeal No. 1; Appeal No. 2·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The orders of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant adequately preserved the argument that the exclusion of his wife from the courtroom violated his right to a public trial (see People v Alvarez, 20 NY3d 75, 81 [2012]; see also People v Caban, 14 NY3d 369, 373 [2010]). The closure of the courtroom during jury selection was not trivial (see People v Martin, 16 NY3d 607, 613 [2011]).

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith and Pigott concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), orders affirmed in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The orders of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant adequately preserved the argument that the exclusion of his wife from the courtroom violated his right to a public trial (see People v Alvarez, 20 NY3d 75, 81 [2012]; see also People v Caban, 14 NY3d 369, 373 [2010]). The closure of the courtroom during jury selection was not trivial (see People v Martin, 16 NY3d 607, 613 [2011]).

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith and Pigott concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), orders affirmed in a memorandum.

People v. Torres, 20 N.Y.3d 890 (N.Y. 2012).

Pincite

20 N.Y.3d 890 (People v. Torres) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related