Legal Opinion

People v. Kinitsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided August 15, 1986PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*160OPINION OF THE COURT

Bracken, J.

CPL 300.10 imposes upon the trial court in a criminal case a mandatory duty to deliver a charge to the jury containing certain required instructions. In particular, in a case where the lack of the defendant’s criminal responsibility by reason of mental disease or defect has been raised, the court is obliged to deliver a specific charge, in language prescribed in the statute, on the consequences of a verdict of not responsible by reason of mental disease or defect (CPL 300.10 [3]). We hold that the trial court’s failure to have delivered the required charge in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. VereenNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
  2. People v. BrittNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
  3. People v. DoctorAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
  4. People v. BrittAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. People v. BehlinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  2. People v. HaysAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
  3. People v. KinitskyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  4. People v. AlstonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019
  5. People v. McIntosh, New York County Courts1998

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

Powered by the Exa API