People v. Marrero
| Decision Date | 06 July 1981 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Appellant, v. Edwin MARRERO and Edgar Marrero, Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Eugene Gold, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Michael Gore, Asst. Dist. Atty., Brooklyn, of counsel), for appellant.
Halbert & Abramovitz, Brooklyn, for respondent Edwin Marrero.
Flamhaft, Levy, Kamins & Hirsch, Brooklyn (Stephen Flamhaft, Brooklyn, of counsel), for respondent Edgar Marrero.
Before DAMIANI, J. P., and TITONE, GIBBONS and WEINSTEIN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated December 23, 1980, which set aside jury verdicts finding each defendant guilty of manslaughter in the first degree and assault in the second degree, on the ground of juror misconduct (CPL 330.30, subd. 2).
Order affirmed.
The evidence at the posttrial hearing established that prior to deliberations the jurors and alternate jurors engaged in extensive discussions of the evidence in the case, the credibility of the evidence, the nature of the neighborhood where the crimes occurred, the involvement of defendants and witnesses in street gangs, and the purported characteristics of Puerto Rican street gangs. Thus, it appears that the verdicts of the jurors may have been affected by outside influences, to wit, the opinions of the alternate jurors, and extraneous material (see People v. Brown, 48 N.Y.2d 388, 393-394, 423 N.Y.S.2d 461, 399 N.E.2d 51). On these facts, it cannot be said that the trial court abused its discretion when it set aside the verdicts on the ground of juror misconduct (cf. People v. Gordon, 77 A.D.2d 662, 430 N.Y.S.2d 147; United States v. Hockridge, 2 Cir., 573 F.2d 752, cert. den. 439 U.S. 821, 99 S.Ct. 85, 58 L.Ed.2d 112; United States v. Panebianco, 2 Cir., 543 F.2d 447, 457, cert. den. 429 U.S. 1103, 97 S.Ct. 1128, 51 L.Ed.2d 553; United States v. Flynn, 2 Cir., 216 F.2d 354, 374, cert. den. 348 U.S. 909, 75 S.Ct. 295, 99 L.Ed. 713).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Horney
...conclusions about the case before summations and charge (People v. Saunders, 120 Misc.2d 1087, 467 N.Y.S.2d 110, supra; People v. Marrero, 83 A.D.2d 565, 441 N.Y.S.2d 12 People v. Gordon, 77 A.D.2d 662, 430 N.Y.S.2d 147 ). Also, the verdict may have been affected by outside influences, such......
-
People v. Rohrer, Docket No. 91806
...after conducting a hearing, the trial judge finds the jury discussions so egregious as to prejudice the defendant People v. Marrero, 83 A.D.2d 565, 441 N.Y.S.2d 12 (1981); State v. Drake, 31 N.C.App. 187, 229 S.E.2d 51 (1976), we have found no decision in other jurisdictions where discussio......
-
People v. Horney
...upon "outside influences". In the whole these comments related to tangential issues unrelated to the evidence. (Cf. People v. Marrero, 83 A.D.2d 565, 441 N.Y.S.2d 12.) B. DISCUSSIONS AT THE During the second night of sequestration at the hotel, two pairs of juror roommates held brief conver......
-
People v. Saunders
...that substantially prejudiced his right to a fair trial (People v. Cocco, 305 N.Y. 282, 113 N.E.2d 422 [1953]; People v. Marrero, 83 A.D.2d 565, 441 N.Y.S.2d 12 [2d Dept., 1981] In response, the People assert defendant has failed to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that any al......