From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Cole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Aug 11, 1994
207 A.D.2d 273 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

August 11, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ivan Warner, J.).


The cumulative effect of numerous errors by the court was to deny appellant a fair trial (see, People v. Pegeise, 195 A.D.2d 337).

It was error for the court to reinstate the 8th count in the indictment charging criminal possession of a weapon. The court had dismissed that count before the prosecution rested, and granted the People's motion to reinstate the count after the defense rested. This constitutes double jeopardy (People v Davis, 91 A.D.2d 948; People v. Zagarino, 74 A.D.2d 115, 120).

We find numerous errors in this record, including an apparent lack of evenhandedness in soliciting and considering the opinions of respective counsel on such issues as responding to a note from the jury. In addition to the erroneous exclusion of defendant's children from the courtroom, which had the effect of excluding his wife also, and would in itself constitute sufficient grounds for reversal (see, People v. Martinez, 172 A.D.2d 428), the court committed numerous other errors, including barring cross-examination of a testifying police officer concerning an alleged encounter between the officer and appellant at a check-cashing store after the arrest where the officer allegedly told defendant, "we are going to get you."

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rosenberger, Kupferman, Ross and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Cole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Aug 11, 1994
207 A.D.2d 273 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Cole

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANTHONY COLE, Appellant

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

Date published: Aug 11, 1994

Citations

207 A.D.2d 273 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
615 N.Y.S.2d 393

Citing Cases

People v. James

The court responded: "Eight years old. I will not permit an eight year old to be here during my charge or the…

People v. Jackson

Before: Rosenberger, Wallach, Kupferman and Tom, JJ. Defendant's double jeopardy rights were not violated…