People v. Warren
| Decision Date | 23 March 1981 |
| Citation | 437 N.Y.S.2d 19,80 A.D.2d 905 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Loy WARREN, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Sheehy & Friedler, Hempstead (Sydney Friedler, Hempstead, of counsel), for appellant.
Denis Dillon, Dist. Atty., Mineola (Laurie S. Hershey and William C. Donnino, Asst. Dist. Attys., Mineola, of counsel), for respondent.
Before LAZER, J. P., and GIBBONS, GULOTTA and COHALAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County rendered January 18, 1980, convicting him of bail jumping in the first degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.
Judgment reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, indictment dismissed, and case remitted to the County Court, Nassau County, for entry of an order in its discretion pursuant to CPL 160.50.
Following the conclusion of the defendant's direct case at his nonjury trial, the court, rather than inquiring as to the People's desire to present any further evidence or calling for summations (see CPL 320.20, subd. 3), proceeded at some length and without objection to review the evidence and render a verdict acquitting the defendant of the underlying charges. At this juncture, the People requested and were granted leave to present a rebuttal witness and, on the basis of his testimony, the court reversed its decision and found the defendant guilty. We reverse and dismiss.
By failing to register a timely protest when the trial court began to render its verdict, the People must be deemed to have acquiesced in the court's consideration of the merits of the case at that juncture and on the then-existing state of the record. Pronouncement of a verdict acquitting the defendant on the ground of evidentiary insufficiency thus constituted a factual determination on the issue of guilt or innocence in the defendant's favor, and rendered the subsequent grant of leave by the trial court to reopen the People's case a violation of defendant's constitutional protection against double jeopardy (see United States v. Scott, 437 U.S. 82, 90-91, 98 S.Ct. 2187, 2193, 57 L.Ed.2d 65; Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1, 11, 98 S.Ct. 2141, 57 L.Ed.2d 1; see, also, Matter of De Canzio v. Kennedy, 67 A.D.2d 111, 116, 415 N.Y.S.2d 513, mot. for lv. to app. den. 47 N.Y.2d 709, 419 N.Y.S.2d 1025, 393 N.E.2d 491; cf. People v. Boynton, 67 A.D.2d 982, 413 N.Y.S.2d 431; Matter of Pastrana v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lionel F., Matter of
...of dismissal, whether or not the order has been formally entered (People v. Lerner, 128 A.D.2d 641, 512 N.Y.S.2d 886; People v. Warren, 80 A.D.2d 905, 437 N.Y.S.2d 19; Pugh v. State, 271 Md. 701, 319 A.2d 542; State ex rel. C.K., 198 N.J.Super. 290, 486 A2d 1284 [App Div]; see also, Matter ......
-
State v. Sperry
...offense."12 Tinker v. State, 549 N.E.2d 1065 (Ind.App.2d Dist.1990); Lowe v. State, 242 Kan. 64, 744 P.2d 856 (1987); People v. Warren 437 N.Y.S.2d 19, 80 A.D.2d 905 (1981).13 Moreover, defendant's reliance on the holdings of other jurisdictions, see 149 Or.App. at 698, n. 12, 945 P.2d at 5......
-
McBarnette v. Sobol
... ... Finally, an ironclad promise of confidentiality cloaks the program with "the appearance of inviolable trust" (Matter of Grattan v. People, 65 N.Y.2d 243, 246, 491 N.Y.S.2d 125, 480 N.E.2d 714), and in so doing serves the State's interest in encouraging voluntary reporting of misconduct ... ...
-
People v. Lerner
...dismissed pursuant thereto to a jury, would clearly violate the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy (cf. People v. Warren, 80 A.D.2d 905, 437 N.Y.S.2d 19). Accordingly, the People's appeal from the order entered July 9, 1984, must be dismissed, the order entered July 9, 1984,......