People v. Collins
| Citation | 2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 08645,44 N.Y.S.3d 830,145 A.D.3d 1479 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Todd M. COLLINS, Defendant–Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 23 December 2016 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
145 A.D.3d 1479
44 N.Y.S.3d 830
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 08645
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Todd M. COLLINS, Defendant–Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Dec. 23, 2016.
Easton Thompson Kasperek Shiffrin LLP, Rochester (Brian Shiffrin of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant.
R. Michael Tantillo, District Attorney, Canandaigua (James B. Ritts of Counsel), for Respondent.
PRESENT: CARNI, J.P., DeJOSEPH, NEMOYER, TROUTMAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM:
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, of sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.65[3] ). We agree with defendant that the conviction must be reversed because County Court erroneously denied his challenge for cause to a prospective juror whose son is married to the daughter of the District Attorney of Ontario County, R. Michael Tantillo, and who has a grandchild
in common with the District Attorney. Contrary to the People's contention, defendant's challenge is preserved for our review inasmuch as he challenged the prospective juror based upon "basically the whole Tantillo connection." We further note that, following the denial of the challenge for cause, defendant exercised a peremptory challenge against the prospective juror and later exhausted his peremptory challenges before the
completion of jury selection (see CPL 270.20[2] ; People v. Lynch, 95 N.Y.2d 243, 248, 715 N.Y.S.2d 691, 738 N.E.2d 1172 ). We conclude that the prospective juror should have been excused from service for cause on the ground that he bears a " relationship to [the District Attorney] of such nature that it [was] likely to preclude him from rendering an impartial verdict" (CPL 270.20[1][c] ; see People v. Branch, 46 N.Y.2d 645, 651–652, 415 N.Y.S.2d 985, 389 N.E.2d 467 ; People v. Bedard, 132 A.D.3d 1070, 1071, 18 N.Y.S.3d 217 ; People v. Clark, 125 A.D.2d 868, 869–870, 510 N.Y.S.2d 223, lv. denied 69 N.Y.2d 878, 515 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 507 N.E.2d 1096 ).
We also agree with defendant that reversal is required because the court erred in excluding...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Thomas, 1016
...; see People v. Scott , 16 N.Y.3d 589, 592–593, 595, 925 N.Y.S.2d 384, 949 N.E.2d 475 [2011] ; People v. Collins , 145 A.D.3d 1479, 1479–1480, 44 N.Y.S.3d 830 [4th Dept. 2016] ). "[N]ot all relationships, particularly professional ones, between a prospective juror and relevant persons, incl......
-
Sierra v. Annucci
...of Jay v. Fischer, 118 A.D.3d 1364, 1364, 986 N.Y.S.2d 899, appeal dismissed 24 N.Y.3d 975, 995 N.Y.S.2d 699, 20 N.E.3d 644 ; see Matter 44 N.Y.S.3d 830of Pujals v. Fischer, 87 A.D.3d 767, 767, 928 N.Y.S.2d 867 ; Matter of Mullen v. Superintendent of Southport Corr. Facility, 29 A.D.3d 1244......
-
People v. Kilgore
...statement, and the court therefore should have permitted cross-examination of the detective regarding that inconsistency (see Collins, 145 A.D.3d at 1480; People v Mullings, 83 A.D.3d 871, 872 [2d 2011], lv denied 17 N.Y.3d 904 [2011]). The People contend that any error in excluding the tes......
-
People v. Kilgore
...2823, 61 L.Ed.2d 275 [1979], rearg dismissed 56 N.Y.2d 646, 450 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 436 N.E.2d 196 [1982] ; People v. Collins , 145 A.D.3d 1479, 1480, 44 N.Y.S.3d 830 [4th Dept. 2016] ). "To lay the foundation for contradiction, it is necessary to ask the witness specifically whether he [or she]......