People v. Jamison
| Decision Date | 14 June 1979 |
| Citation | 47 N.Y.2d 882,419 N.Y.S.2d 472 |
| Parties | , 393 N.E.2d 467 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Daniel JAMISON, also known as James Jamieson, also known as Daniel Jamieson, also known as George Storfs, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
On the present record, it cannot be concluded that the Trial Justice unduly or improperly injected himself into the proceedings, or that he displayed bias or hostility toward the defendant's case. As previously recognized, neither the nature of our adversary system nor the constitutional requirement of a fair trial preclude a trial court from assuming an active role in the truth-seeking process (see, e. g., People v. Moulton, 43 N.Y.2d 944, 945, 403 N.Y.S.2d 892, 893, 374 N.E.2d 1243, 1244; People v. De Jesus, 42 N.Y.2d 519, 523, 399 N.Y.S.2d 196, 198, 369 N.E.2d 752, 755). Often the Judge plays a vital role at trial by clarifying the issues to be resolved and restricting the proof to reasonable bounds (People v. De Jesus, supra, at p. 523, 399 N.Y.S.2d at p. 198, 369 N.E.2d at p. 755). This power must, of course, be exercised sparingly, without partiality, bias or hostility (People v. Carter, 40 N.Y.2d 933, 934, 389 N.Y.S.2d 835, 836, 358 N.E.2d 517, 518; People v. Budd, 38 N.Y.2d 988, 989, 384 N.Y.S.2d 435-436, 348 N.E.2d 911, 912), as excessive interference or the suggestion of an opinion on the part of the Trial Judge might well prove decisive in the minds of the jury (People v. De Jesus, supra, 42 N.Y.2d at p. 524, 399 N.Y.S.2d at p. 199, 369, N.E.2d at p. 755; People v. Bell, 38 N.Y.2d 116, 120, 378 N.Y.S.2d 686, 689, 341 N.E.2d 246, 248).
Here, the court intervened in the proceedings evenhandedly, rather infrequently and, so far as appears, only when necessary to aid the jury in understanding the legal and factual issues presented. Neither the defense nor the prosecution was singled out for special treatment, and the defense was not treated in a hostile fashion. In short, we are unable to say that the court exceeded the proper bounds of its supervisory role during the trial. Similarly, that portion of the charge to the jury preserved for review is not beset by prejudicial error.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- People v. Joseph
-
People v. Kachadourian
...of the jury's focus" ( People v. De Jesus, 42 N.Y.2d at 523, 399 N.Y.S.2d 196, 369 N.E.2d 752 ; see People v. Jamison, 47 N.Y.2d 882, 883–884, 419 N.Y.S.2d 472, 393 N.E.2d 467 [1979] ). In this bench trial, there was no risk of such improper influence (see People v. Byrd, 152 A.D.3d 984, 98......
-
People v. Melendez
...N.E.2d 556). A Justice is generally not precluded from taking an active role in the truth-seeking process (People v. Jamison, 47 N.Y.2d 882, 883, 419 N.Y.S.2d 472, 393 N.E.2d 467) and indeed, may take the initiative to clarify confusing testimony and facilitate the orderly and expeditious p......
-
People v. Parker
...that their discretion to intervene is not unfettered and must be exercised sparingly (see People v Arnold, 98 N.Y.2d at 67-68; People v Jamison, 47 N.Y.2d 882, 883). RIVERA, J.P., DILLON, and IANNACCI, JJ., WOOTEN, J., dissents, and votes to reverse the judgment, as a matter of discretion i......
-
Judicial conduct
...trial moving and reduces the impact of confrontational behavior. JUDICIAL CONDUCT 17-15 Judicial Conduct §17:70 CASES People v. Jamison , 47 N.Y.2d 882, 419 N.Y.S.2d 472 (1979). A trial court may inject itself and may exercise a supervisory role at trial if neither counsel is singled out fo......
-
Table of cases
...616, 797 N.Y.S.2d 129 (2d Dept. 2005), § 5:160 People v. James , 93 N.Y. 2d 620, 695 N.Y.S.2d 715 (1999), § 5:180 People v. Jamison, 47 N.Y.2d 882, 419 N.Y.S.2d 472 (1979), §§ 15:40, 17:70, 17:80 People v. Jean, 75 N.Y.2d 744, 551 N.Y.S.2d 889 (1989), §§ 2:170, 2:180, 2:250 People v. Jenkin......
-
Judicial conduct
...or stipulating to certain facts keeps the trial moving and reduces the impact of confrontational behavior. CASES People v. Jamison , 47 N.Y.2d 882, 419 N.Y.S.2d 472 (1979). A trial court may inject itself and may exercise a supervisory role at trial if neither counsel is singled out for spe......
-
Judicial conduct
...or stipulating to certain facts keeps the trial moving and reduces the impact of confrontational behavior. CASES People v. Jamison , 47 N.Y.2d 882, 419 N.Y.S.2d 472 (1979). A trial court may inject itself and may exercise a supervisory role at trial if neither counsel is singled out for spe......