People v. Fields
New York Court of Appeals
1DissentTitone, J.
I would reverse the judgment and order a new trial because the court’s reasonable doubt charge incorporated language that diluted the People’s burden of proof and, even when read in conjunction with the remainder of the charge, created a substantial risk of confusion.
We are unanimous in the conclusion that the portion of the reasonable doubt charge of which defendant complains was improper. As is implicit in the majority’s holding, the disputed instruction conveys the false impression that the People may prevail if the evidence weighs slightly more heavily in their *824favor (see, e.g., People v…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Sullivan v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- People v. AntommarchiNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- People v. WarrenNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- People v. CelestinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.