From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rodriguez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 28, 1995
214 A.D.2d 1047 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

April 28, 1995

Appeal from the Monroe County Court, Maloy, J.

Present — Green, J.P., Fallon, Callahan, Doerr and Davis, JJ.


Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and facts and new trial granted. Memorandum: Following a reconstruction hearing (see, People v Mitchell, 189 A.D.2d 337), County Court found that Sandoval proceedings had been held in chambers outside of defendant's presence. Consequently, reversal of defendant's conviction is required (see, People v Dokes, 79 N.Y.2d 656), unless the record reveals that the court's Sandoval ruling was wholly favorable to defendant (see, People v Odiat, 82 N.Y.2d 872, 874; People v Favor, 82 N.Y.2d 254, 268, reargument denied 83 N.Y.2d 801).

We credit the testimony of defendant's trial attorney at the reconstruction hearing that the court's Sandoval ruling permitted the prosecutor to cross-examine defendant about a prior drug conviction. Thus, the Sandoval ruling was not wholly favorable to defendant and reversal is required. We note, however, that the better practice is for the Judge who presides at the reconstruction hearing to make a factual finding concerning the content of the Sandoval ruling.


Summaries of

People v. Rodriguez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 28, 1995
214 A.D.2d 1047 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Rodriguez

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JULIO RODRIGUEZ…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Apr 28, 1995

Citations

214 A.D.2d 1047 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
626 N.Y.S.2d 943

Citing Cases

People v. James

At the conclusion of the reconstruction hearing, the court, with the agreement of the parties, indicated that…