From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rosado

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 8, 1999
262 A.D.2d 62 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

June 8, 1999.

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Joseph Cerbone, J.).


Although the court did not notify defense counsel prior to complying with the deliberating jury's request for chalk and a ruler, reversal pursuant to People v. O'Rama ( 78 N.Y.2d 270) is not mandated because the jury's note did not request any substantive information ( see, People v. Damiano, 87 N.Y.2d 477, 487). Defendant's claim that the jury may have made improper use of these materials is waived ( see, People v. Ayers, 214 A.D.2d 459, lv denied 86 N.Y.2d 732; see also, People v. Argibay, 45 N.Y.2d 45, 52-53), as well as being unreviewable ( see, People v. Kinchen, 60 N.Y.2d 772) because defendant objected to any attempt by the court to question or instruct the jurors about this subject. Under these circumstances, the court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant's motion for a mistrial, the only remedy he requested when the situation came to light ( People v. Ayers, supra).

Concur — Williams, J.P., Wallach, Andrias and Friedman, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Rosado

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 8, 1999
262 A.D.2d 62 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

People v. Rosado

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. IGNACIO ROSADO…

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

Date published: Jun 8, 1999

Citations

262 A.D.2d 62 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
691 N.Y.S.2d 452

Citing Cases

People v. Roberites

The note sent by the jury simply requested [some of the evidence], which both the jury and [defendant] were…

People v. Miller

The brief rhetorical flourishes at issue did not deprive defendant of a fair trial, particularly in view of…