§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Respondent,v.Mark Nonni, Appellant.

Brief

19 Cited authorities

  1. Strickland v. Washington

    466 U.S. 668 (1984)   Cited 158,880 times   176 Legal Analyses
    Holding an "error by counsel" doesn't "warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding" where in the context of the whole proceeding the identified error "had no effect on the judgment"

  2. Chapman v. California

    386 U.S. 18 (1967)   Cited 23,490 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"

  3. People v. Crimmins

    36 N.Y.2d 230 (N.Y. 1975)   Cited 5,689 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an error is prejudicial "if an appellate court concludes that there is a significant probability, rather than only a rational possibility, in the particular case that the jury would have acquitted the defendant had it not been for the error or errors which occurred"

  4. People v. Catu

    4 N.Y.3d 242 (N.Y. 2005)   Cited 507 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Vacating guilty plea when defendant not told of PRS because PRS is a "definite, immediate and largely automatic" direct consequence of sentence

  5. People v. O'Rama

    78 N.Y.2d 270 (N.Y. 1991)   Cited 571 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding the defendant was prejudiced when the court failed to read a portion of the jury note stating jury was split "6/6," told counsel the jury was experiencing "continued disagreements," and subsequently issued a supplemental instruction urging a verdict

  6. People v. Mack

    2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 4321 (N.Y. 2016)   Cited 110 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Mack, the Court of Appeals made clear that a court should follow a two-step process when it receives a jury note: (1) give counsel notice that a note has been received; and (2) meaningfully respond to the note.

  7. People v. Kisoon

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 1194 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 132 times
    In People v. Kisoon, 8 N.Y.3d 129, 132, 831 N.Y.S.2d 738, 739 (2007), the New York Court of Appeals considered "whether a trial court committed a mode of proceedings error when it failed to disclose... a jury note."

  8. People v. Silva

    2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 8215 (N.Y. 2014)   Cited 63 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In People v. Silva, 24 N.Y.3d 294, 998 N.Y.S.2d 154, 22 N.E.3d 1022 [2014] and People v. Hanson, 24 N.Y.3d 294, 998 N.Y.S.2d 154, 22 N.E.3d 1022 [2014], the Court of Appeals held that the trial courts committed mode of proceedings errors by failing to notify counsel of jury notes before the juries in each case reached their verdicts, even though the transcripts in both cases failed to establish whether the courts were aware that the notes had been submitted.

  9. People v. Tabb

    2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 8679 (N.Y. 2009)   Cited 70 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an "absence of record proof constituted "a mode of proceedings error . . . requiring reversal"

  10. People v. Lourido

    70 N.Y.2d 428 (N.Y. 1987)   Cited 127 times
    In Lourido, we found an error sufficient, in combination with others, to compel reversal where the jury requested a read-back of the cross-examination of a key witness, received no response and rendered a verdict some three hours later; we implied that the court should at least have asked the jury, before accepting the verdict, whether it still wanted the testimony read back (id. at 431-433).

  11. Section 500.11 - Alternative procedure for selected appeals

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.11   Cited 539 times

    (a) On its own motion, the court may review selected appeals by an alternative procedure. Such appeals shall be determined on the intermediate appellate court record or appendix and briefs, the writings in the courts below and additional letter submissions on the merits. The clerk of the court shall notify all parties by letter when an appeal has been selected for review pursuant to this section. Appellant may request such review in its preliminary appeal statement. Respondent may request such review