Opinion
March 26, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Calabretta, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered before a different Judge. No questions of fact have been raised or considered.
In concluding its jury instructions, the court presented the jury with a verdict sheet which contained selected elements of the crimes charged and factual parentheticals.
A verdict sheet shall contain "the offenses submitted to the jury by the court in its charge and the possible verdicts thereon" (CPL 310.20). The Court of Appeals has ruled that submission of a verdict sheet to the jury which specifies the elements of the counts charged is not authorized by CPL 310.20 (2) and constitutes reversible error absent consent of the parties (People v Nimmons, 72 N.Y.2d 830; People v [Frankie] Valle, 143 A.D.2d 160). The verdict sheet in issue not only improperly contained selected elements of the counts charged but included factual parentheticals, constituting further error (see, People v Koschtschuk, 119 A.D.2d 994). Since such error may not be deemed harmless (People v Owens, 69 N.Y.2d 585), we must reverse.
In light of our conclusion that there must be a reversal on the basis of the verdict sheet error, we need address only one of the defendant's remaining contentions. Inasmuch as we find that the Trial Judge was overzealous in repeatedly interjecting himself during the questioning of witnesses (see, People v De Jesus, 42 N.Y.2d 519), we conclude that a retrial before a different Judge is appropriate. Sullivan, J.P., Harwood, Balletta and Miller, JJ., concur.