Legal Opinion

People v. Minarich

New York Court of Appeals

Decided March 22, 1979PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The orders of the Appellate Division should be reversed, and the cases remitted for a new trial.

The Appellate Division correctly held, and indeed the People concede, that James Longtin was an accomplice as a matter of law (CPL 60.22, subd 2; see People v Beaudet, 32 NY2d 371). The trial court was therefore required to instruct the jury that Longtin was an accomplice, and that defendants could not be convicted on Longtin’s testimony absent corroborative evidence (CPL 60.22, subd 1). "Failure to so charge the jury was necessarily harmful error” (People v Jenner,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. BeaudetNew York Court of Appeals · 1973
  2. People v. JennerNew York Court of Appeals · 1971

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. People v. MartinezNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. People v. SageNew York Court of Appeals · 2014
  3. People v. TuneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  4. People v. RamosAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
  5. People v. StrawderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986

28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API