Opinion
March 2, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrus, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.
The sequence of events surrounding the jury's multiple, and in some respects repetitious, requests for readbacks of certain trial testimony is accurately set forth in the Supreme Court's opinion (see, People v. Smith, 168 Misc.2d 33). Even in light of all the factors cited by the Supreme Court in its opinion, we have no alternative but to conclude that the court's refusal to respond in any meaningful way to the jury's last request for the readback of stated portions of the testimony of two witnesses constituted reversible error. "[T]he court's response was not meaningful because it was no response at all" (People v. Lourido, 70 N.Y.2d 428, 435; see also, People v. Miller, 183 A.D.2d 790; People v. Colon, 151 A.D.2d 146, cert. denied 508 U.S. 923; People v. Arcarola, 96 A.D.2d 1081).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions to the extent appropriate in light of our conclusion that a new trial is necessary, and find them to be without merit.
Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Krausman and Luciano, JJ., concur.