Legal Opinion

People v. Brundidge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided September 27, 1996PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: By failing to object to the procedure used by Supreme Court in responding to notes received from the jury during deliberations, defendant failed to preserve for review her present argument that she was denied a meaningful opportunity to assist the court in formulating responses (see, People v Starling, 85 NY2d 509, 516; People v DeRosario, 81 NY2d 801, 803; People v Green, 207 AD2d 318, 319, lv denied 84 NY2d 935; cf, People v O’Rama, 78 NY2d 270). The verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495).…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. BleakleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. People v. O'RamaNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
  3. People v. StarlingNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
  4. People v. DeRosarioNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  5. People v. GreenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. People v. SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API