People v. Vincenty
This text of 501 N.E.2d 587 (People v. Vincenty) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and a new trial ordered.
The Trial Judge distributed portions of his preliminary instructions to the jury in writing, which included a written outline of the elements of robbery in the first degree. Defendant’s objection to this procedure was preserved for this court’s review as it was sufficiently specific (see, People v Vidal, 26 NY2d 249, 254; People v West, 56 NY2d 662, 663). This procedure violated defendant’s right to a fair trial, and the error cannot be considered harmless (see, People v Townsend, 67 NY2d 815).
[900]*900Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Alexander, Titone and Hancock, Jr., concur; Judge Kaye taking no part.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order reversed and a new trial ordered in a memorandum.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
501 N.E.2d 587, 68 N.Y.2d 899, 508 N.Y.S.2d 938, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 20611, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-vincenty-ny-1986.