TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

People v. Monty

The People of the State of New York v. Joseph Monty

People v. Monty, 45 A.D.2d 1038 (1974)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
July 29, 1974
Citations
45 A.D.2d 1038358 N.Y.S.2d 1811974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4297

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Judgment of the Extraordinary Special and Trial Term, Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered March 18, 1974, affirmed. During the course of the trial, the trial court repeatedly, and quite properly, reminded the jury of its duty not to discuss the case or read anything about it. On the fourth day of trial, defense counsel pointed to two small clippings in the Long Island Press reporting on the trial, and requested the court to poll the jury again to see if anyone had read either article. The Assistant Special Prosecutor contended that the two articles contained only a brief summary of the court testimony and could not prejudice defendant. Defense counsel persisted in asking for a poll of the jury. The court consented to defense counsel’s request but insisted, over objection, that he would tell the jury that it was being polled at his request. The court thereafter so informed the jury. If the defendant was not entitled to have the jury polled, the court should have denied his request. If he was entitled to have the jury polled the court should not have placed any possible onus for the request on the defense. However, in the entire setting of this case we deem the error harmless (CPL 470.05, subd. 1). The case is remitted to the Extraordinary Special and Trial Term, Supreme Court, Queens County, for proceedings to direct appellant to surrender himself to said court in order that execution of the judgment be commenced or resumed (CPL 460.50, subd. 5). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Latham, Shapiro, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list