From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Bonilla

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 19, 1992
186 A.D.2d 748 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

October 19, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (DeLury, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered. No questions of fact have been raised or considered.

On the second day of deliberations in this case, the Trial Justice received a note from the jury indicating that the jurors were deadlocked. With the consent of counsel for both parties and without bringing the jury into the courtroom, the Trial Justice sent a written note to the jury instructing them to "continue with your deliberations". Thus, the Trial Justice committed reversible error by failing to follow the prescribed procedure set forth in CPL 310.30, violating the defendant's absolute right to be present at all material stages of a trial, including instructions to the jury (see, People v Mehmedi, 69 N.Y.2d 759, 760; People v Jones, 159 A.D.2d 644). The fact that the defendant failed to raise specific objections to the Trial Justice's conduct does not preclude appellate review as a matter of law, since errors which affect the organization of the court or the mode of proceedings prescribed by law need not be preserved for appellate review (see, People v Coons, 75 N.Y.2d 796; People v Mehmedi, supra, at 760).

In view of the foregoing, we have no occasion to reach the remaining issues raised by the defendant. Mangano, P.J., Sullivan, Balletta and O'Brien, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Bonilla

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 19, 1992
186 A.D.2d 748 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. Bonilla

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOSE BONILLA, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 19, 1992

Citations

186 A.D.2d 748 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
589 N.Y.S.2d 61

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

In these circumstances, however, his presence was not required. The court's statement did not constitute a…

People v. Moyler

Further, the court may not delegate the responsibility of communicating with the jury to non-judicial…