The People v. Lee Carr / The People v. Walter Cates, Sr.
New York Court of Appeals
1DissentFahey, J.
The trial court conducted an in camera interview with a prosecution witness to ascertain whether his migraine was too debilitating for him to testify that day. The court granted an adjournment, for a second time, and the witness testified the next day. Now, the majority, holding that this was reversible error, grants defendants a new trial, because the interview “concerned potentially significant evidence that defense counsel may have found useful during cross-examination at trial” (majority op at 113). In my view, the in camera inquiry here was permissible because it was merely ministerial.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- People v. FrostNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
- People v. ContrerasNew York Court of Appeals · 2009
- People v. CarrAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013