From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Minarich

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 22, 1979
389 N.E.2d 137 (N.Y. 1979)

Opinion

Argued February 8, 1979

Decided March 22, 1979

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

Anna M. Perry and Henry F. Middlemiss, Jr., for appellants.

Patrick Henry, District Attorney (Vincent A. Malito of counsel), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM.

The orders of the Appellate Division should be reversed, and the cases remitted for a new trial.

The Appellate Division correctly held, and indeed the People concede, that James Longtin was an accomplice as a matter of law (CPL 60.22, subd 2; see People v Beaudet, 32 N.Y.2d 371). The trial court was therefore required to instruct the jury that Longtin was an accomplice, and that defendants could not be convicted on Longtin's testimony absent corroborative evidence (CPL 60.22, subd 1). "Failure to so charge the jury was necessarily harmful error" (People v Jenner, 29 N.Y.2d 695, 696-697).

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

Orders reversed, etc.


Summaries of

People v. Minarich

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 22, 1979
389 N.E.2d 137 (N.Y. 1979)
Case details for

People v. Minarich

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. WILLIAM MINARICH, Also…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 22, 1979

Citations

389 N.E.2d 137 (N.Y. 1979)
389 N.E.2d 137
415 N.Y.S.2d 825

Citing Cases

People v. Sage

This is deemed to be true because such individuals may be subject to pressures impelling them to color…

People v. Sage

This is deemed to be true because such individuals may be subject to pressures impelling them to color…