From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Roppolo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 2, 1942
263 App. Div. 995 (N.Y. App. Div. 1942)

Opinion

March 2, 1942.

Appeal from County Court of Queens County.


There was proof on the part of the People that defendant drove his truck at an excessive speed, disregarded and passed a red light signal at a street intersection, and that the truck was struck by a bus which was crossing at right angles to the path of defendant's truck, resulting in the death of a wayfarer. Defendant claimed that as he entered the intersection the light signal was green in his favor and turned to red directly after he had entered the intersection, so that he did not have an opportunity to stop, with the result that the bus, entering on a signal which had just turned green, collided with his truck. Despite the conflict in the testimony, the jury was fully justified in finding defendant guilty as charged. However, serious error was committed by the court in connection with instructions to the jury given when it had returned to court after having deliberated more than six hours. The jury inquired of the court if it might find a verdict with a recommendation, meaning a recommendation of leniency. The court instructed the jury that it should find such a verdict as it deemed proper. The effect of the court's charge was that the jury was told that it might find a verdict with a recommendation of leniency and from that it may have been led to believe that, if it found such a verdict, the recommendation might receive consideration by the court. Eight minutes after the jury was so instructed, about enough time for the jury to retire and return to the courtroom, the jury found a verdict of guilty, with a recommendation of leniency. The instruction was erroneous and, in view of the conflict in the proof and the requirements of section 420 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the error may not be overlooked ( People v. Sherwood, 271 N.Y. 427; People v. Lynch, 284 id. 239), though no exception was taken. (Code Crim. Proc. § 527.) Judgment of conviction reversed on the law and a new trial ordered. As the appeal from the judgment of conviction raises all questions involved, the appeal from the order denying a motion for a new trial, made after such a motion had been duly made and denied and sentence pronounced, is dismissed. Lazansky, P.J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Roppolo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 2, 1942
263 App. Div. 995 (N.Y. App. Div. 1942)
Case details for

People v. Roppolo

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CHARLES ROPPOLO, True…

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

Date published: Mar 2, 1942

Citations

263 App. Div. 995 (N.Y. App. Div. 1942)

Citing Cases

United States v. Krulewitch

No objection was made nor request that the answer be qualified in any way. Now it is argued that the judgment…