People v. Minarich
New York Court of Appeals
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
- People v. BeaudetNew York Court of Appeals · 1973
- People v. JennerNew York Court of Appeals · 1971
3Cited by33 opinions
- People v. MartinezNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
- People v. SageNew York Court of Appeals · 2014
- People v. TuneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- People v. RamosAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
- 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.