People v. Telesford

OPINION OF THE COURT

Renwick J.

In this case, we must determine what supplemental instructions are required when a jury repeatedly expresses confusion, during deliberations, about the concept of intent in a robbery prosecution of two defendants charged under an accessorial liability theory. Under the circumstances here, we find that defendants were deprived of a fair trial when the court erred by merely rereading robbery and accessorial liability charges to the jury.

Factual and Procedural Background

Evidence Adduced at Trial

The robbery charges stem from defendants’ alleged forcible taking or…