From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Carbonell

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 18, 1976
40 N.Y.2d 948 (N.Y. 1976)

Summary

In Carbonell, the court reversed as "internally self-contradictory" a guilty verdict on robbery in the third degree where the jury had acquitted the defendant of larceny and petit larceny.

Summary of this case from People v. Dercole

Opinion

Argued October 20, 1976

Decided November 18, 1976

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, JOHN J. RYAN, J.

Joel A. Brenner and Martin S. Dorfman for appellant.

Eugene Gold, District Attorney (Steven T. Wax and Eugene H. Scher of counsel), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM. Order of the Appellate Division reversed, the judgment of conviction vacated and the indictment dismissed. The jury verdict was internally self-contradictory both logically and pursuant to the charge of the court. By acquitting defendant of all the larceny counts the verdict of guilty of robbery in the third degree was contradicted, since the robbery could not have occurred unless, as an essential element of the crime, there had been a larceny in some degree (cf. People v Cole, 35 N.Y.2d 911). As pointed out by defendant's appellate counsel there need not have been an acquittal on the larceny counts so long as the jury under proper instructions returned a verdict of guilty under the robbery count. But the fact is that the jury did both. It had not been advised by the trial court that if it found defendant guilty of robbery, it did not have to reach the larceny counts. On the contrary, the jury was instructed that if it found no larceny it must acquit on all charges. The other issues raised by defendant do not need address in light of the disposition.

Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and COOKE concur in memorandum.

Order reversed, etc.


Summaries of

People v. Carbonell

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 18, 1976
40 N.Y.2d 948 (N.Y. 1976)

In Carbonell, the court reversed as "internally self-contradictory" a guilty verdict on robbery in the third degree where the jury had acquitted the defendant of larceny and petit larceny.

Summary of this case from People v. Dercole

In People v Carbonell (40 N.Y.2d 948), the Court of Appeals broadened its view of the repugnancy rule to encompass guilty verdicts which negatived an "essential element" of a count upon which there had been conviction.

Summary of this case from People v. Dercole

In Carbonell, the Court of Appeals held that the jury verdict of guilty of Robbery in the Third Degree but not guilty of Larceny was internally self contradictory.

Summary of this case from People v. Wright
Case details for

People v. Carbonell

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. FREDERICK E…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Nov 18, 1976

Citations

40 N.Y.2d 948 (N.Y. 1976)
390 N.Y.S.2d 409
358 N.E.2d 1034

Citing Cases

People v. Wright

Accordingly, the verdict is not repugnant. Finally, defendant's reliance on People v. Carbonell (40 N.Y. 2d…

People v. Tucker

The jury returned verdicts of not guilty of the first and second counts and guilty of the third, fourth and…