From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Van

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 10, 1990
161 A.D.2d 326 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

May 10, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Leslie Crocker Snyder, J.).


On appeal, defendant raises a single claim, arguing that he was absent at a material stage of the proceedings when the court, during a lunch recess, received a note from the deliberating jury requesting a report which was not in evidence. The court directed the clerk to advise the jury that the report was not in evidence. However, when the parties returned, counsel was advised of what had transpired and requested that the jury be advised that they could have reread certain testimony which related to this record. This was done and defendant did not object to this procedure at trial.

We conclude that by not only failing to object, but by specifically requesting another communication with the jury, defendant has waived this claim for review. Even if we were to review in the interest of justice, however, while the advisable procedure would have been to wait for all parties to return, the jury's request, coupled with the court's response, raised no issues affecting any "substantial right" of defendant, and the communication between court and jury outside of defendant's presence was not such "a material part of the trial" requiring reversal (People v. Mullen, 44 N.Y.2d 1, 5).

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Ross, Asch and Wallach, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Van

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 10, 1990
161 A.D.2d 326 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Van

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. BILLY VAN, Appellant

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

Date published: May 10, 1990

Citations

161 A.D.2d 326 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
555 N.Y.S.2d 91

Citing Cases

People v. Townes

The ultimate determination was clearly a matter which fell within the jury's province. With respect to the…

People v. Romero

Defendant now argues that he was denied his right of confrontation when, in his absence, a postcharge…