From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Wing

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Sep 20, 1984
63 N.Y.2d 754 (N.Y. 1984)

Opinion

Argued September 7, 1984

Decided September 20, 1984

Appeal from the Monroe County Court, Donald J. Mark, J., Walter M. Pelkey, J.

Edward J. Nowak, Public Defender ( Peter D. Braun of counsel), for appellants.

Howard R. Relin, District Attorney ( Michael J. Nelson of counsel), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM.

The order of the County Court should be reversed and the case remitted to the Town Court of Chili for further proceedings on the information.

The abundance of inadmissible hearsay evidence permitted by the trial court created a "substantial probability of irreparable prejudice" to defendants' case. ( Matter of Leon RR, 48 N.Y.2d 117, 122; see, also, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 242.) Over the objections of the defendants, the prosecution was repeatedly allowed to elicit testimony and to introduce documents that were clearly hearsay, despite the absence of any recognized exception to the rule against hearsay. Considering these errors cumulatively, it cannot be said that they were harmless.

In view of the foregoing, we need not reach defendants' other contentions.

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, JONES, MEYER, SIMONS and KAYE concur in memorandum; Judge WACHTLER taking no part.

Order reversed, etc.


Summaries of

People v. Wing

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Sep 20, 1984
63 N.Y.2d 754 (N.Y. 1984)
Case details for

People v. Wing

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CHARLES WING and…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Sep 20, 1984

Citations

63 N.Y.2d 754 (N.Y. 1984)

Citing Cases

People v. Weinstein

is substantively the same (see People v Grant, 7 N.Y.3d 421, 424 [2006] [citation omitted]). Finally, in…

People v. Cardew

Decedent's statement to Forrest did not fall within any of the hearsay exceptions (see, People v. Nieves, 67…