People v. Yarbrough

2025 NY Slip Op 00118
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 8, 2025
DocketInd. No. 27/13
StatusPublished

This text of 2025 NY Slip Op 00118 (People v. Yarbrough) 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. Yarbrough, 2025 NY Slip Op 00118 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

People v Yarbrough (2025 NY Slip Op 00118)
People v Yarbrough
2025 NY Slip Op 00118
Decided on January 8, 2025
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on January 8, 2025 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
BETSY BARROS, J.P.
DEBORAH A. DOWLING
LOURDES M. VENTURA
JAMES P. MCCORMACK, JJ.

2016-11608
(Ind. No. 27/13)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Jamane Yarbrough, appellant.


Twyla Carter, New York, NY (Arthur H. Hopkirk of counsel), for appellant.

Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (Johnnette Traill and Nancy Fitzpatrick Talcott of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Gregory Lasak, J.), rendered October 3, 2016, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for a new trial.

The defendant and a codefendant were jointly tried and convicted of various crimes. As the People correctly concede, the defendant's judgment of conviction must be reversed and a new trial held for the reasons stated by the Court of Appeals in reversing the conviction of the codefendant (see People v Deverow, 38 NY3d 157). The defendant raises claims on this appeal identical to those that warranted reversal on the codefendant's appeal (see People v Brown, 217 AD3d 424, 424; People v Lemus, 121 AD3d 918, 918).

In light of our determination, we need not reach the defendant's remaining contentions.

BARROS, J.P., DOWLING, VENTURA and MCCORMACK, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Lemus
121 A.D.3d 918 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2025 NY Slip Op 00118, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-yarbrough-nyappdiv-2025.